τἀ Ἶοὶ 
ἈΜῊΝ 


ΠΝ 


Heiden 
a 
ae 

uit 


a vie 
to ete! 
VRB 

thd 
sfapetaralee ¢igie! 
Rens 


δεν 


“-- 


Cha be eed 
veto 


eu te εν 
shy) 








τὰ ΤΥ Δ tA ks OY uy. ae ἢ 
ἦν ἘΣ ; δὴ HK 7 ὍΝ 2 ? ay Corns | ὟΝ ᾿ κα . 
Piya Ἂ γι: ᾿ TAS Kany ΨΥ " ὌΝ “τ 
᾿ εὐ ΤΑ J ᾿ Ὶ ih ὦ 
PM ol) oh RS fy | 
ΟΝ aN 
‘ pat ᾽ν 
ΠΝ eas ᾿ 
{ hy if 
tr, 
rang ἢ 





From the Library of 
Professor Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield 
Benueathed by him to : 
the Library of 
Princeton Chealogiral Seminary 





ee ἜΘ 2. 67 5 


Section ) 


es - + 
a ee ee 
eg OLLI LL 


Mt FRO Pe - 


= 






‘at 
ΣῊ 
panes 
Lik 
f »" 
5 


. 
Z —< 














A 


COMMENTARY 


ON THE 


HOLY SCRIPTURES: 


CRITICAL DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETICAL, 


‘WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO MINISTERS AND STUDENTS, 


BY 


JOHN PETER LANGE, D.D., 


IN CONNECTION WITH A NUMBER OF EMINENT EUROPEAN DIVINES. 


TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, AND EDITED, WITH ADDITIONS, 


BY 


PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., 


IN CONNECTION WITH AMERICAN DIVINES OF VARIOUS EVANGELICAL DENOMINATIONS, 


} VOL VI. OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: CONTAINING THE TWO EPISTLES OF PAUL TO 
THE CORINTHIANS. 


NEW YORK: at 
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S/SONS, 


743 AND 745 BROADWAY. 






seca «The 





i. ἄγη 
᾿ 4 ; : : : 
+ 2s ’ 5 } 4 
+ oe i > \ A ᾽ i ᾿ 
\y : ΓΟ NOPE NBER PRES AL AOR 
‘ ἐ ᾿ ἕ » A 
‘ Υ ΠΟ Τ᾿ ἢ ᾿ ΤΣ ἐδ τ ἷ 
‘ Ψ 9 ald er 


ἕ 
΄ ' 
τ τ ΄. . 
* 
¢ 
Ν + 
ῃ 
͵ ᾿ 
3 J 
! 
& ᾿ 
AF! " 
\ 
Ϊ, ᾿ Υ 7 
‘ 
‘ 
’ 
aL 3 
wes - Ν 
Ze, a Ἵ 
Υ) 
a A 4 χ᾽ {ν Ι “.. 
wie 
é -“ Ψ 
sa j δὲ (Ὗ ὦ » L ΠΣ ὅ ΤΆ, ¢ 
2 be : ‘2 2 EAT he 
» ‘ = a) 4 aly 





ΤῊΝ 


FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL 


TO THE 


SOR. N TH TANS. 


BY 


CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH KLING, 


DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY, AND LATE DEAN OF MARBACH ON THE NECKAR. 


TRANSLATED FROM THE SECOND REVISED GERHAN EDI?ION, 
WITH ADDITIONS, . 


BY 


DANIEL W. POOR, D.D., 


PROFESSOR IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, SAN FRANCISCO, ΟΑξω 


NEW YORK: 
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 


743 AND 745 BROADWAY. 











in i ᾿ 
d,s. Y i ’ 
» i " i 
ἔν i ( ta rk ΤΑ, i τὰ 
ἢ) γ ἢ 7 i ἢ yd fis 
ν νου, 
ry 
i γὰ 
ῃ ᾿ (oe I 
i 
4 
‘ 
, i 
} Ϊ “δ, 
i ae ‘ LE 
΄ 
, 


ENTERED, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by 
; CHP sa ital & σον 


of New York, 





: ’ 
PRINTING AND Boot 
205-213 East τ 
Bale 
τ ἐφ 


LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS 


TO THE CRITICAL, DOCTRINAL, AND HOMILETICAL COMMEN. 
TARY ON THE BIBLE. 








GENERAL EDITORS: 


Rev. JOHANN PETER LANGE, D.D., 
Consistorial Counselor and Professor of Theology in the University of Bonn. 


Rev. PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LL.D, _ 
Professor of Sacred Literature in the Union Theological Seminary, New York. 





I. CONTRIBUTORS TO THE GERMAN EDITION. 


Rey. C. A. AUBERLEN, Ph.D., D.D., 


ofessor of Theology in the University of Basle, 
Switzerland, 


Rev. KARL CHR. W. F. BAHR, D.D., 
Ministerial Counselor at Carlsruhe, 


Rev. KARL BRAUNE, D.D., 
General Superintendent at Altenburg, Saxony, 


Rev. PAULUS CASSEL, Ph.D., 
Professor in Berlin. 


Rev. CHR. FR. DAVID ERDMANN, D.D., 
Gen, Superintendent of Silesia, and Prof. Honorarius of 


Theology in the University of Breslau. 
Rev. F. R. FAY, 
Pastor in Crefeld, Prussia. 


Rev. G. F. C. FRONMULLER, Ph.D., 
Pastor at Kemnath, Wurtemberg. 


. 
Rev. KARL GEROK, D.D., 
Prelate and Chief Chaplain of the Court, Stuttgart. 


Rev. PAUL KLEINERT, Ph.D., B.D., 


Professor of Old Testament Exegesis in the University 
of Berlin, 


Rev. CHRIST. FR. KLING, D.D., 
Dean of Marbach on the Neckar, Wuartemberg. 


Rev. GOTTHARD VICTOR LECHLER, D.D., 
Professor of Theology, and Superintendent at Leipzig. 


Rev. CARL BERNHARD MOLL, D.D., 
General Superintendent in Kénigsberg. 


Rev. C. W. EDWARD NAEGELSBACH, Ph.D., 
Dean at Bayreuth, Bavaria 


Rev. J. J. VAN OOSTERZEBE, D.D., 
Professor of Theology in the University of Utrec’.t, 


Rev. C. J. RIGGENBACH, D.D., 
Professor of Theology in the University of Basle. 


Rev. OTTO SCHMOLLER, Ph.D., B.D., 
Urach, Wiartemberg. 


Rev. FR. JULIUS SCHROEDER, D.D., 
Pastor at Elberfeld, Prussia. 
Rev. FR. W. SCHULTZ, D.D., 
Professor of Theology in Breslau. 


Rev. OTTO ZOECKLER, D.D., 
Professor of Theology in the University at Greifswald 





tl. CONTRIBUTORS TO THE ANGLO-AMERICAN EDITION. 


Rev. CHARLES A. AIKEN, Ph.D., D.D., 


Professor of Christian Ethics and Apologetics at 
Princeton, N. J, 


Rev. SAMUEL RALPH ASBURY, M.A., 
Philadelphia. 


Rev. GEORGE R. BLISS, D.D., 
Professor in Crozer Theological Seminary, Upland, Pa. 


Rev. CHAS. A. BRIGGS, D.D., 


Professor of Oriental Languages in the Union Theological 
Seminary, New York. 


΄ 


Rev. TALBOT W. CHAMBERS, D.D., 


Pastor of the Collegiate Reformed Dutch Church, 
New York, 


Rev. THOMAS J, CONANT, D.D,, 
Brooklyn, N. Y. 


Rey. E. R. CRAVEN, D.D., 
Newark, N. J. 


Rev. HOWARD CROSBY, D.D., LL.D., 
Chancellor of the University of New York 


»»"Ἱ yo 


LIST OF OONTRIBUTORS. 


Rev. JOHN A. BROADUS, D.D., 
Professor of New Testament Exegesis at Louisville, Ky. 


Rev. CHAS. ELLIOTT, D.D., 
Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, Chicago, Ill. 


Rev. L. J. EVANS, D.D., 
Professor of New Test. Exegesis in Lane Theol. Seminary, 
Cincinnati. 
Rev. PATRICK FAIRBAIRN, D.D., 
Principal and Professor of Divinity in the Free Church 
College, Glasgow. 
Rev. WILLIAM FINDLAY, M.A., 
Pastor of the Free Church, Larkhall, Scotland. 


Rev. JOHN FORSYTH, D.D., LL.D., 

Chaplain and Prof. of Ethics and Law in U. 8. Military 
Academy, West Point, N. Y. 

Rev. FREDERIC GARDINER, D.D., 

Prof. of the Literature of the O. T. in Berkeley Divinity 
School, Middletown, Ct. 
Rev. ABRAHAM GOSMAN, D.D., 
Lawrenceville, N, J. 


Rev. W. HENRY GREEN, D.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Oriental Literature in the Theol. Seminary at 
Princeton, N. J. 

Rev. JAMES B. HAMMOND, M.A, 

New York. 


Rev. HORATIO B, HACKETT, D.D, 
Professo1 of Biblical Exegesis in the Theological Seminary, 
Rochester, N. Y. 

Rev. CHESTER Ὁ. HARTRANFT, D.D., 

New Brunswick, N. J. 


Rev. EDWIN HARWOOD, D.D., 
Rector of Trinity Church, New Haven, Conn. 


Rev. W. H. HORNBLOWER, D.D., 
Professor of Sacred Rhetoric, etc., in the Theol. Seminary 
at Alleghany, Pa. 
Rev. JOHN F. HURST, D.D., 
President of the Drew Theological Seminary, 
Madison, N. J. 
Rey, A. CO. KENDRIOK, D.D., LL.D., 
Jrotessor of Greek in the University of Rochester, N. Y. 


TAYLER LEWIS, LL.D., 


Professor of Oriental Languages in Union College, 
Schenectady, N. Y. 


Rev. JOHN LILLIE, D.D., 
Kingston, N. Y. 


Rev. SAMUEL T. LOWRIE, D.D., 
Philadelphia, Pa. 


Rev. J. FRED. McCURDY, M.A., 


A εἰ Professor of the Hebrew Language in the Theol. Sem. 


at Princeton, N. J 


Rev. CHARLES M. MEAD, Ph.D., 


Pyvolasgor of the Hebrew Language and Literature in the 
Theol Sem., Aadove:, Mass, 


Rev. GEO. E. DAY, Ὁ D., 
Professor in Yale Divinity School, New Haven, Ooan. 


Rev. J. ISADOR MOMBERT, D.D., 
Philadelphia, Pa. 


Rev. DUNLOP MOORE, D.D., 
New Brighton, Pa. 


Miss EVELINA MOORE, 
Newark, Ν, J. 


JAMES G. MURPHY, LL.D., 


Professor in the General Assembly’s and the Queen's 
College at Belfast. : 


Rev. HOWARD OSGOOD, D.D., 


Professor of the Interpretation of the Old Test. in the 
Theol, Sem., Rochester, N. Y. 


Rev. JOSEPH PACKARD, D.D. 


Professor of Biblical Literature in the Theological 
Seminary at Alexandria, Va. 


Rev. DANIEL W. POOR, D.D., 


Professor of Church History in the Theological Seminary 
at San Francisco, Cal. 


Rev. MATTHEW B. RIDDLE, D.D., 


Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the Theol. 
Seminary at Hartford, Conn. 


Rev. CHAS. F. SCHAEFFER, D.D., 


Professor of Theology in the Evangelical Lutheran 
Seminary at Philadelphia. 


Rev. WILLIAM G. T. SHEDD, D.D., LL.D., 


Professor of Systematic Theology in the Union Theologica) 
Seminary, New York. 


Rev. CHAS. C. STARBUCK, M.A., 


Formerly Tutcr in the Theological Seminary at Andover, 
Mass. 


Rev. P. H. STEENSTRA, 
Professor of Biblical Literature at Cambridge, Mass. 


Rev. JAMES STRONG, D.D., 


Professor of Exegetical Theology in the Drew Theological 
Seminary, Madison, N. J. 


e 
Rev. W. G. SUMNER, M.A., 
Professor in Yale College, New Haven, Conn. 


Rev. C. H. TOY, D.D., 
Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis, 
Louisville, Ky. 
Rev. E. A. WASHBURN, D.D., LL.D., 
Rector of Calvary Church, New York. 


WILLIAM WELLS, M.A., LL.D., 


Professor of Modern Languages in Union Collegs, 
New York. 


Rev, 0. P. WING, D.D., 
Carlisle, Pa. 


Rev, K. D. YEOMANS, D.B., 
Czange, M. J. 


TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. 


Arter nearly four years of labor, remitted at intervals by reason of ill-health, I am able 
to lay before the public Dr. Kling’s able Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians in 
something of an English dress, The difficulties of translating his involved and scholastic style, 
designed only for German students, into readable English, suited for the public at large, can be 
known only by such as have attempted a like task. To have translated literally, and have 
strictly followed his method, would have been to make the work a comparative failure. By the 
consent, therefore, of the principal Editor, Dr. Schaff, I have, without altering the meaning, 
introduced such modifications of method and style as seemed necessary to give the Commentary 
the widest circulation. The changes made have been mainly, in substituting an English text 
for the Greek, excepting where the latter was absolutely required to render the comment intelli- 
gible,—in intercalating this text through the body of the Commentary instead of putting a few 
catch- words at the head of the paragraphs,—in breaking up the majority of the ponderous sen- 
tences into their component parts (a few being left as specimens here and there to show what a 
German scholar is capable of in this direction)—and in omitting some portions of the homile- 
tical and practical sections which seemed to be needlessly extended. The parts added by me, 
are all inserted in brackets, with the exception of the text in black letter, and the headings under 
the caption “ Doctrinal and Ethical” which are italicized. All matter thus enclosed, which is 
not accredited to particular authors, must be ascribed to me. This general acknowledgment of 
responsibility I have preferred to make here, rather than insert Tr. or D. W. P. all down the 
page—say, as a whim of my own. The additions made by me, it will be seen, amount to over 
one quarter of the whole Commentary. The authors consulted have been mainly Alford, Stan- 
ley, Wordsworth, Hodge, Robertson, Bloomfield, Barnes, Poole, Scott, Whitby, Meyer, de Wette, 
Olshausen, Bengel, Calvin, and Chrysostom. Such portions of their several works as seemed 
calculated to shed light on the text, or to illustrate the course of Biblical Criticism, I have freely 
used. These frequent citations, while they have served to enrich the body of thought, naturally 
tended to break up the logical structure of the paragraphs; but the lack of continuity, where- 
ever seen to exist, will be tolerated for the sake of the benefit derived. 

To the homiletical sections I have added the plans of such sermons as I have found in my 
library, not being in circumstances freely to consult any other as I would gladly have done. 

In consequence of my ill-health, Dr. C. P. Wing, who has been pleasantly associated with 
me in preparing the Second Epistle, kindly consented to assist in furnishing the critica) notes 
on the text from chapter VII. to the end. In this he has been far more full and painstaking 
than I was in the earlier chapters; for which scholars will thank him. The portions added by 
him are eae properly distinguished by his initials C. P. W. 


il» TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. 


With these explanations I submit the work to the candid judgment of the Christian public, 
in the hope that they will find it a serviceable addition to the abundant and exceedingly valuable 
Commentaries that have been already issued on this portion of the New Testament. If it will 
aid in leading any to the better understanding and appreciation of this most important portion 
of Scripture, giving them a tithe of the benefit I have enjoyed, it will be the largest count in my 
recompense for the labor spent on it. Severe criticism on the style of the translation I must 

_deprecate in advance. If I have succeeded in putting Dr. Kling’s exceedingly involved, prolix, 
cumbrous, yet thoughtful style into readable English, it is more than I dared to hope for after 
having enlisted in the work and clearly apprehended the nature of the task before me. In con- 
sequence of being obliged to recast the whole of the exegetical and critical part, and, as it were, 
work myself into a new method, some slight errors of punctuation and lettering will be found in 
the earlier chapters, for which I ask the reader’s indulgence. : 

With the ever-growing conviction that no Commentary of uninspired man can ever exhaust 
the fullness of meaning contained in the Scriptures, and deeply conscious how far short this new 
effort falls below the attainable standard, I with diffidence present it to the Church as a tribute 
of humble reverence and affection for the Word of God, and a token of sincere desire that this 
Word may be more and more known, felt, and enjoyed by all believers, not only in its obvious 
scope and more general meaning, but also in the subtler implications and suggestions of its 
moods and tenses, its particles and order of language, being all informed by the Spirit of the 
Living One who is the Sum and Source of all Beauty, Goodness, and Truth. 


D. W. POOR. 
Newarez, March 21, 1868. 


The translation of this part of the Biblework is made from the second German edition, 1865, 
as revised by the Rev. Mr. Havrr, of Gmiind, an intimate friend of Dr. Kune, who died a few 
weexs after the date of his preface to the first edition (March 1, 1861). 

PS 


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF DR. KLING. 


BY 


THE AMERICAN EDITOR. 


Frrepricu CuristrAn Kuina, D. D., the author of the Commentary on the Epistles to the: 
Corinthians in Dr. Lange’s Bzbelwerk, was born Nov. 4, 1800, at Altdorf, in the kingdom of 
Wirtemberg, and died at Marbach in April, 1861. His father was a clergyman of the Evangeli- 
cal Lutheran Church, and destined him for the same calling. Young Kling passed through that. 
thorough systematic course of classical, philosophical and theological training for which the: 
Gymnasia, the lower Seminaries (Maulbroun, Schénthal, Blaubeuren and Urach), and the Uni-- 
versity of Wurtemberg are unsurpassed even in Germany. After graduating in Tubingen he: 
went to the University of Berlin, which was then at the height of its fame in the theological de- 
partment. He attended chiefly the lectures of Schleiermacher and Neander, and enjoyed their 
personal friendship. His theological views were moulded by these celebrated divines, especially 
by Neander; but like most of their pupils, he advanced beyond them in the direction of a posi- 
tive evangelical orthodoxy. 

On his return to Wirtemberg in 1824 he spent a few years as Repetent in the theological 
Seminary at Tubingen—an honorable position of tutor and assistant professor, to which a few of 
the best scholars of each graduating class are appointed, with the additional advantage of a 
literary journey at the expense of the government. In March, 1826, he was elected deacon (7. 6. 
assistant minister) in the town of Waiblingen, where he spent six useful and happy years. He: 
was married to a grand-daughter of the celebrated philosopher, Fr. H. Jacobi. While faithfully’ 
discharging his duties as pastor, he furnished frequent contributions to leading theological Re- 
views, which made his name favorably known throughout Germany. 

In 1832 Dr. Kling received and accepted a call as professor of theology in the University of 
Marburg, where he labored successfully and acceptably for ten years. In 1842 he followed a call 
to the University of Bonn, and taught there till 1849 alongside of such eminent colleagues as. 
Drs. Nitzsch, Bleek and Sack. The state of his health induced him to withdraw from the aca- 
demic career to which he had devoted seventeen of his best years, to the more quiet and simple 
life of a country pastor at Ebersbach, in his native Wirtemberg. When his health was re- 
stored, he entered upon a more extensive sphere of labor as Dean of Marbach on the Neckar (the 
birth-place of Schiller), His leisure hours he devoted to theological study till his peaceful death. 

Dr. Kling was a gentleman of great simplicity and purity of character, plain and modest in 


appearance, gentle and amiable in temper, kind and affectionate in disposition, decidedly evan- 
iii 


1v BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF DR. KLING. 





gelical, yet liberal in his views, of solid learning, sound and sober judgment, sincere and humble 
piety. As a pupil of Schleiermacher and Neander, he retained from the former a lively interest in 
the systematic arrangement and speculative construction of the doctrines of Christianity from 
the Christological and soteriological principle; while with Neander he shared a love of Scriptural 
simplicity, and taste for history and held to the motto: Pectus est quod facit theologum. 
He was no creative genius, opening new avenues of thought, but followed in the track of great 
and good men, yet with fine discrimination and independent judgment. He was not brilliant 
either as a lecturer or preacher, but very iustructive, sound and winning, and was highly es- 
teemed and beloved by all who knew him. I spent several days with him in the family of Dr. 
Krummacher at Elberfeld (now at Potsdam) in 1844, where, together with Dr. Krummacher and 
Dr. Sander, he assisted at my ordination on the eve of my departure for America; and I met 
him afterwards at Stuttgard and at a missionary festival at Basel in 1854. I well remember the 
impression which his sweet and lovely spirit, his simplicity and humility made upon all on those 
occasions, and how he reminded us of the beloved disciple. 

Dr. Kling commenced his literary career in 1824 by publishing from manuscripts, at the sug- 
gestion of Neander, the sermons of Bertholdt, a powerful Franciscan revival preacher of the 13th 
century, who is said to have addressed crowds of from 60,000 to 200,000 people, hungry for the 
bread of Life. This work was favorably reviewed by the celebrated German philologist, Jacob 
Grimm, and opened a mine of theological lore which lay buried among the German writers of the 
middle age. Since that time he prepared no extensive work except the Commentary on the 
Epistles to the Corinthians, to which he devoted the last years of his life. He wrote the Preface 
a few weeks before his death. He had repeatedly lectured on these Epistles while professor at 
Marburg and Bonn, and published comments on the more difficult sections in the Studien und 
Kritiken. Ue laid himself out mainly in the exegetical and doctrinal sections, while the homi- 
letical hints are mostly gathered from older sources. This Commentary was well received for its 
solid learning and Christian spirit; but the style is somewhat heavy and diffuse. Hence I al- 
lowed the translators full liberty to reproduce it freely in justice to the English idiom as well as 
the thoughts of the original. Itisno disparagement of the author to say that the American trans¢ 
lators have greatly improved his work by condensation and valuable additions and adaptation te 
the English reader. Every page gives proof of their independent scholarly labor. The German edi- 
tion contains 417, the English 596 pages, and a good deal of the new matter is in very small type. 

Dr. Kling was also a constant and highly esteemed contributor to the first theological Reviews 
of Germany, such as the Studien und Kritiken, the Tiibinger Zeitschrift fiir Theologie, the Deutsche 
Zeitschrift, etc., in which he took an active part in the leading exegetical, critical and doctrinal 
questions of the age. His essays and reviews were always marked by conscientious care, solidity, 
sound sense, and justice to all who differed from him. Among the many elaborate articles and 
discussions of his industrious pen we may mention those on Clement of Alexandria, Hasse’s An- 
selm of Canterbury, the early life of Neander, Baur’s view on the Epistle to the Romans, on 
several passages in the Corinthians, on Schaff’s History of the Apostolic Church, on the relation 
of philosophy and theology,—all in ULtMann AND UmBretr’s Studien und Kritiken. He also 
furnished the articles on “Athanasius,” “Augustine,” “ Bertholdt the Franciscan,” “ Hilary of 
Poictiers,” ‘“Marheinecke,” ‘ Mohler,” “Christianity,” “Conversion,” “ Justification,” and other 
important subjects for Herzoa’s “Theological Encyclopedia;” but he died before the com- 
pletion of this work, and found an honorable place in a supplementary volume (XIX. p. 704: 
706) of this great storehouse of the modern evangelical theology of Germany. - Pe 


THE 


EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





INTRODUCTION. 


21. THE POSITION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE EPISTLES. 


The Epistles to the Corinthians occupy the second place in the series ascribed to Paul, 
according to the order of Scripture. Preceding that to the Romans in the order of time by 
nearly a year, they rank next to it in importance, as it respects both their contents, and the 
Church addressed. 

I. As to their contents, These are mainly of a practical kind. Unlike what we find so 
abundantly in the other Epistles of our author, we encounter here no discussions on the cardinal 
questions of Christianity, whether dogmatical or apologetic. Nothing is here said of the need 
of salvation, felt by the ancient world; nor of the supply of this need through Christ; nor of the 
relations of Christianity to the elder dispensation; nor of the nature of the Gospel salvation; nor 
of the way it fulfilled the law and the promise; nor of the great plan of God’s kingdom in relation 
to both Jews and Gentiles; nor of the part these were to bear in successively drawing each other 
to a participation of divine grace. Topics of this sort here give place to others, more particularly 
called for by the peculiar condition of the Corinthian Church. Taking occasion from the circum- 
stances immediately in view, Paul, in these Epistles, labors rather to exhibit the bearings of 
Christianity upon human conduct in its several relations to the church, to the state, to society in 
general, and to domestic life. And first of all, he begins with setting forth the varied condition of 
things in the Church, especially in their moral form and aspect. Under this head he treats of the 
position which church-members hold to their teachers; of their worthy maintenance of the grace 
which they have received; and of their high calling, both towards those who are Christians and 
those who are not,—alike at home and abroad,—but, above all, in the assemblier of the saints, 
whether convened in solemn festival, or for general edification. In short, Paul here solves the 
problem of preserving and restoring the purity of the Church as a body consecrated to God 
in Christ, by setting at work brotherly love, as well in the mutual furtherance of each other’s 
spiritual welfare—especially through the right use of spiritual gifts, as in the friendly balancing 
of all inequalities of outward condition, by a ready generosity on the part of the rich. From 
this he goes on, taking occasion from the attempts of his opponents to undermine his Apostolical 
character and influence, to give various expositions of an apologetic and polemic kind respecting 
the Apostolic office, its value, and the proper recognition of it, especially in reference to himself 
and his position. One doctrinal question only is directly and thoroughly handled,—that of the 
resurrection of the dead (1 Cor. xv.); and this is so done that its connection with the bay tek 


6 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


pe eee 
facts of Christianity, and its bearing upon the whole body of Christian truth, as well as its 
ethical elements, is made to appear in the clearest light. 

That Epistles of so preéminently ethical a character (whose teachings are, however, every 
where made to rest on their proper doctrinal,basis) should be made to follow an Epistle like that 
to the Romans, was perfectly proper—all the more so, because of their importance in a twofold 
respect: 1. Historically, as illustrating to a remarkable degree the condition and circumstances 
of the Christian churches in the midst of the pagan world; 2. Normally, inasmuch as the Apostle 
so portrays the proper demeanor of a Christian Church and of those holding office in and for it, 
that churches and office-bearers may here find a mirror for themselves for all time to come. 

II. Looking at the relative importance of the two churches (at Rome and at Corinth), it must 
be conceded, that the church of the former city, as being the capital of a world-wide empire, and 
furnishing the largest opportunity for the spread of the Gospel, stands preéminent. Yet the 
church at Corinth, too, possessed a high degree of consequence, derived from the peculiar position 
and character of the city in which it was planted. Corinth, as is well known, was the metropolis 
of Achaia—a province that embraced in its bounds Hellas and the Peloponnesus. Situated on a 
narrow isthmus which just parted the Ionian Sea from the Peloponnesus, it commanded two cele- 
brated harbors—the one looking toward the East, and the other toward the West. It thus became 
the centre of an extended and varied commerce. The arts and sciences also flourished there in 
unrivalled splendor. It was noted, too, as the centre of religious worship for the whole Greek 
nation. In it was gathered a population numbering from 400,000 to 500,000—comprising people 
from all parts of the world. Of these a large portion were Latins, the descendants of that 
colony which had been sent here by Julius Czxsar, about a century and a half previously, for the 
purpose of recovering it from the desolation and ruin which had been brought upon it by Mum- 
mius. An illustration of Paul’s estimate of the importance of the place we have in the fact, that 
he labored here no less than a year and a half for the establishment of a church. In his view, it 
was a fit point from whence the Gospel might be made to diffuse its rays far and wide over the 
world, and where a church, once planted, might stand forth as an example for other churches 
scattered over the globe, whose members would naturally cluster here upon the errands of trade 
and commerce. And for this there were peculiar facilities arising from the manifold activity and 
cultivation of the people generally, which gave promise of a spiritual development no less rich 
and varied. But while Corinth presented peculiar advantages for a church, it also abounded 
in peculiar perils. No place was so noted for its luxury and licentiousness as Corinth.. 
The infamous goddess Aphrodite was here worshipped with sensual rites of the grossest kind, 
having no less than three thousand priestesses of loose character ministering at her shrine. 
Indeed, so notorious was the dissipation of the people, that the word Corinthianise (κορινϑιάνιζειν) 
was used to express conduct the most voluptuous and debauched. There was danger therefore 
lest in such a place the development of a Christian church would be obstructed by prevailing 
immoralities. No less great an evil was to be apprehended from the peculiar proneness of 
the Greek mind to intellectual conceit and party strife. In short, it may be said that in this one 
city there were concentrated in the fullest degree all those dangerous and corrupting influences 
which proceed from a thorough-going epicureanism, at once the most vicious and the most 
refined. ; 

A church occupying so important a position, and at the same time so beset with temptations, 
naturally required a special care on the part of the Apostle. Of this the two Epistles before us give 
abundant evidence. The nearer the Apostle stood related to this church, founded by his labors, 
and the more it threatened to deviate from its true course or actually went astray, the more was 


3 2. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. 7 





he, as its spiritual father, constrained to exert himself in its behalf and give vent to his own deep 
emotions of concern for its welfare; and the more energetically, too, did he find it necessary to 
assert the consciousness of the position which he held towards them. In the first of these 
Epistles it is only here and there that he gives us a glimpse into ‘his inmost thoughts and feelings 
on the subject. But itis from the second that we ascertain far more of the real traits of his 
noble character. For here it is, that, with the most unrestrained candor, and borne on by emotions 
which carry him beyond himself, he pours forth his whole soul, showing them with the utmost 
frankness how he had felt and acted, labored and suffered in their behalf. At the same time, 
also, in reply to the attacks of his foes, he so conducts his self-defence, that not only what he 
says of himself, but also the way in which he says it, vividly presents to our view abundant 
evidences of his rare fidelity and truthfulness, shining forth, as these traits do, both in his deep 
humility and in his lofty bearing, in his simplicity and in his honesty, in his self-denial and in 
his love, in his magnanimity and in his boldness, in his ardent devotion and in his deliberate 
demeanor, in his exaltation of soul and in his quiet, resigned cross-bearing. 


4 11. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. 


Upon his second missionary tour, after a divine providence had led Paul from Asia to 
Europe (Acts xvi. 7-9), and he had here amid various fortunes established churches at Philippi 
and Thessalonica, and Berea, and finally at Athens had encountered Grecian philosophy, and . 
pride of learning, with the doctrine of a heavenly wisdom, Paul came on his way, about the 
year 52, to Corinth.’ The city was then in the height of its prosperity, puffed up with the 
pride of wealth and the vanity of carnal science, and captivated by a fondness for sophistical 
dialectics and pompous rhetoric; and Paul entered it, not in the lofty consciousness of his own 
strength, but in weakness and fear and much trembling, (Acts xviii. 1; 1 Cor. ii. 3) and with an 
humbling sense of the inadequacy of his own abilities to the great task before him. And his 
resolve was not to oppose human wisdom and eloquence with weapons of like character, but with 
the simple preaching of Christ crucified, in order that the faith of believers might stand in the 
power of God ulone (1 Cor. 11. 1, 5; 2 Cor. x. 3, 4). 

For the sake of support, he first jomed in company, as a tent-maker, with one Aquila, a Jew 
of Asia Minor, who had been banished from Italy in consequence of the decree of Claudius Cesar 
which drove all Jews from Rome (Acts xviii. 2,3). This co-partnership proved also a fellowship 
in the faith. But whether Aquila and Priscilla, his wife, were already Christians at that time, 
or were converted by Paul, it is impossible to decide. His first intercourse on the themes of 
the Gospel was also with the Jews. To them he was directed by the prophecy and the promise 
of which they were the bearers. Among them he obtained an entrance and foothold in the 
character of a travelling brother, and as one learned in the Scriptures. On entering the syna- 
gogue, it was expected of him, as was customary, that he would speak a word by way of edifica- 
tion; and he improved the opportunity to announce, and lay before them for suitable proof 
the advent of the long’expected Messiah. Here, too, he found certain Greeks who had attached 
themselves to the Jewish communion, or who, at least, came occasionally into the synagogues as 
hearers. These, by means of their social position and family connections, formed a bridge of access 
to the rest of the Gentile community. To convince both these parties of the truth which he had 
to impart was therefore his chief labor. But here again, as often before, only a small number 
believed. And when, by the arrival of his helpers, Silas and Timothy, Paul gathered fresh 
strength for his work, a fierce opposition arose, which so kindled the indignation of the Apostle 


8 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 

J SER EERS EE Aan et Denise ΞΘ ΞΘ ΞΘ 5 
that, shaking off the very dust from his mantle, and casting on them the guilt of their exclusion 
from the promised salvation, he declared himself henceforth at liberty to labor with a pure con- 
science among the heathen. From this time onward he delivered his discourses in the house of 
a proselyte, Justus by name, who dwelt hard by the synagogue. Here Crispus, the ruler of the 
synagogue, joined him with all his house, and many others also, who believed and were baptized, 
But with the growth of the church, the opposition rose likewise, and waxed to such a degree 
that the Apostle began to despair, and needed a word of encouragement from the Lord. This 
was graciously vouchsafed him in a night vision—“ Fear not, but speak boldly,” &c. (Acts xviil. 
9,10). The result corresponded with the declaration. An attempt of the Jews to secure a judg- 
ment against Paul before the tribunal of the Proconsul Gallio so signally failed, that the accusers 
themselves were set upon and roughly handled by the Greeks without interference from the 
authorities. After remaining awhile longer in Corinth, Paui departed for Ephesus, attended by 
Aquila and Priscilla, whom he left behind at this latter place as he journeyed onward. ' These 
persons were destined henceforth to exert an important influence upon the development of the 
Corinthian Church. Meeting with the eloquent Apollos, an Alexandrian Jew, who had been 
a disciple of John and was well versed in Christianity, they took him and instructed him in the 
Gospel, and on his going to Corinth gave him letters of introduction to the disciples there. In 
this congenial sphere his talents soon found full scope, and by the assistance of divine grace 
he proved greatly useful to the infant Church through the skill with which he was able to 
convince the Jews, out of their own scriptures, that Jesus was the Christ (Acts xviii. 11, 28.). 
So far the narrative in the Book of Acts. 

Our first Epistle gives us further glimpses into the after-condition and development of this 
Church. We here mark a gratifying progress on the whole. There appears among them a 
wealth of spiritual gifts, especially in the department of religious knowledge (chap. i. 5). But 
there is no steadfastness in the progress made, The old life of nature continues still to assert its 
power in various ways, and in different forms and degrees in different persons, according to their 
several peculiarities and relations, and that, too, to such an extent, that the Apostle denies them a 
proper spiritual character, and designates them as odpxvvor: creatures of flesh, and σαρκικόι: carnal. 


One indication of this carnal temper was seen in the re-appearance of the old Greek Party 


sptril? under a Christian form, The Corinthian Church failed to abide unitedly in Christ. Fol- 
lowing the fashion of the schools, they soon joined themselves to different human organs of the spirit 


of Christ, with a one-sided and exclusive devotion, maintaining and magnifying the peculiar 


excellencies of their favorite teachers in a contentious zeal, until at last they broke into factions, 
each separate tendency pushing itself to an extreme, and settling there.* 
In chap. i. 12, four parties are enumerated,—those of Paul, of Apollos, of Cephas, and of 


Christ; and they are mentioned in the order of their rise. The occasion which gave them ~ 


birth was the appearance of Apollos at Corinth. His mode of understanding and interpreting 
the Gospel was no doubt essentially the same as that of Paul. But while Paul made it a rule to 
preserve the utmost simplicity in his preaching, Apollos, on the contrary, gave full scope to his 
Alexandrine learning and to his well trained powers of eloquence and argument. These shining 
qualities so attracted a portion of the Church, that in their over-estimate of them, they exalted 





1 [Whe termination «vos denotes the material composition ; «xos, the moral quality.] 


2(The tendency to faction had long characterized the Greek race, and has been stigmatized as the peculiar malady 
(ν ό σ ο ς) of the old Greek commonwealths.—STANLEY.] 


8 (These factions were, however, not separations from the Church, but divisions in it —STanuey-] 


τ δ 


ὃ 2. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. & 





Apollos above Paul, as‘a teacher of superior education and culture. In opposition, however, te 
such pride of “wisdom,” Paul insisted upon that “demonstration of the Spirit and of Power” 
(ii. 1, 4; 2 Cor. xi. 6) which characterized his own discourses. ‘Thus an opposition was developed. 
Over against the adherents of Apollos, there arose a party for Paul, who applauded the founder 
of the Church as their master, and wished to make him their head. But while between these 
two parties there existed hardly any essential difference, and the issue respected only the relative 
worth of the two leaders, it was otherwise with those who professed to follow Peter. In this 
case the antagonism turned altogether upon a diversity of views both in morals and religion. 
Inasmuch as there is no proof that Peter himself was ever at Corinth, we must ascribe the origin 
of this movement to the presence of Judaizing teachers, who were interested in setting up a 
strictly legalistic party, and who appealed to Peter’s authority, as an Apostle who had been di- 
rectly called of Christ, and had enjoyed personal communion with him. 

But what does the Apostle mean when he speaks of some as saying that they were “of 
Christ?” If the language here used indicates a vicious partisanship, as would appear both from 
the connection and from the order of the words, how are we to understand it? It were natural 
to suppose here, that in view of the devdtion manifested by the several parties just mentioned 
towards their favorite leaders, there were still others who felt opposed to all adherence to men, 
and were resolved to exalt Christ alone as the Head to whom ¢hey belonged, but who did this in 
so exclusive and partisan a manner, that instead of proving a uniting element in the Church, 
they only made the rents worse. If, now, we may assume with Osiander, that under the opposers 
whom the Apostle assails 2 Cor. x., this party be meant (v.7), we should detect in them a Juda- 
izing clique, (chap. xi. 22) whose leaders, intruding into this Church, arrogated to themselves 
Apostolic authority, while they rejected that of Paul (2 Cor. xi. 5, 15; xiii. 11). That they are 
to be linked with the Petrinists, or are to be regarded as a modification of this party, is an un- 
warrantable assumption, since in 1 Cor. i. 12, they are co-ordinate with these as a distinct body, 
and in the Second Epistle throughout, no-further allusion to Peter occurs.! 

As to the grounds on which they rested their special connection with Christ, opinions differ. 
No sufficient reasons exist for supposing with some that they appealed to a direct family relation- 
ship with Christ, or to an immediate personal acquaintance with him, or, with others (Schen- 
kel, Dahne, Goldhorn), that they were a set of Gnosticizing theosophic mystics, who prided 
themselves upon visions and revelations which they professed to have received from God. Per- 
haps, with Thiersch, (Zhe Church in the Apostolic Age, 2d ed. p. 144.) we might take them to 
have been personal disciples of Christ, tinged with Pharisaic notions, who had come from Pales- 
tine as well as from Rome to Corinth to exert here a dangerous hostility to Paul by stealing 
from him the hearts of the Church, but who had nevertheless so far unmasked themselves as to 
merit from Paul the epithets “false apostles” and “servants of Satan” (2 Cor. xi. 13.). But there 


is no evidence compelling us to such conclusions.2 





1,This also tells against Lechlerin his “Apostolic and post-apostolic Periods” 2d Ed. 1857, p. 386, who says of the Petri- 
nists: “But at the same time they assumed to themselves a pre-eminent and exclusively closer right to Christ himself 
on the ground of a former personal acquaintance with Jesus.” If 2 Cor. x.7 refers to the Christ party, it follows only 
that their leaders were Judaizers from Palestine, who found adherents in Corinth, and who, in opposition to all other 
parties, the Petrine included, designated themselves as “of Christ.” 

2[In opposition to the prevailing views of German critics it may be well here to state the conclusions which Dean 
Alford has given of his investigations on the subject of the parties at Corinth. “(1.) That these designations (I. 12) are 
not used as pointing to actual parties formed and subsisting among them but (2,) as representing the SPIRIT WITH WHICH THEY 
CONTENDED against one another being the sayings of individuals and not of parties.. (“Each one of you saith),” q.d. ‘You 
are all in the habit of alleging against one another, some your special attachment to Paul, some to Apollos, some to 
Cephas, others to no mere human teacher, but barely to Christ to the exclusion of us his apostles.’ (8.) That these sayings, 


10 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





“The “yet carnal” character of the Corinthian church showed itself also in an incapacity rightly 
to apprehend and apply Christian truth in its purity and power, and to enjoy Christian liberty 
in its laws and limitations, They were carnal in their boasting over the gifts of knowledge 
existing in the church, ὦ. 6. their pride of wisdom, their vain self-satisfiedness, and consciousnesg 
of perfected attainment (chap. iii. 4)—Carnal, too, in the grossest sense, was it for a member of 
the church to hold concubinage with his own stepmother; and the church betrayed a lack of 
spiritual life in so far as it was wanting in earnestness, power and courage, sufficient to expel 
this impure and all-defiling element from the midst of it—It was carnal also, only in a different 
direction, for church members to go to daw one with another, and that, too, before heathen 
tribunals (chap. vi. 1-8), since in this there was manifested not only a lack of that yielding 
brotherly love which prefers to suffer wrong than to do wrong, but also a defective sense of the 
high dignity of Christians who are called to share hereafter in the judicial functions of their Lord, 
when he shall sit to judge the world—The immaturity of their carnal state, and their defective 
sense of Christian liberty and obligation, ‘appeared also in the sphere of the sexual relations, 
developing themselves in two opposite directions. On the one hand, there were some who 
insanely held that Christian liberty involved the right to gratify the sexual impulse in promis- 
cuous intercourse with those who prostituted themselves for money, after a fashion allowed and 
religiously consecrated among the Pagans (whoredom)—as if the Christian were free to dispose as 
he chose of that body which God had redeemed unto himself (vi. 12 ff). On the other hand, there 
were those so fettered by legal scruples as to maintain that even marital intercourse was incon- 
sistent with the sanctity of a Christian life, and who therefore insisted not only upon the 
duty of celibacy, but also upon the cessation of connubial intercourse between parties already 
married, yea even upon the dissolution of the marriage tie, in case of one of the parties still 
remaiped unconverted. Such austere notions betrayed a lack of sound religious prudence, an 
ignorance of human infirmity, as well as of that divinely ordained diversity in human constitu- 
tions which rendered what might be possible and meet for one person wholly unsuitable for 
another. They also indicated a want of confidence in the power of Christianity to draw those, who 
consented to remain with believing companions in the closest intimacies of the natural life, into a 
fellowship of the spirit also. And last of all, they evinced a want of insight into the Gospel rule 
of abiding in the vocation wherein a person is called—a rule which ceases to be valid only in 
case the unbelieving party insists on a separation. 

Tn contrast with such asceticism there existed also in some quarters an unrestricted desire 





‘while they are not to be made the basis of any hypothesis respecting definite parties at Corinth, do nevertheless hint at 
matters of fact and are not merely ‘exempli gratia:’ and (4,) that this view of the verse, which was taken by Chrys. 
“Theodoret, Theophylact, Calvin is borne out, and indeed necessitated by ch. iv.6, ‘These things I have ina figure trans- 
ferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes.’” In answer, however, to the argument adduced in support of Alford’s view 


from this last text, as if it implied that Paul had only used the names of himself and Apollos instead of the real names” 


of unknown leaders, by way of accommodation, and to avoid all personal altercation, Stanley well remarks, “This would 
not apply to the use of the name of Cephas, and it is clear that the Apostle in this instance (ch. iv. 6.] merely expresses 
his intention of confining himself to those who called themselves after his name and that of Apollos, in order to show that 
his censure was aimed, not only against his Judaizing opponents, but against the factious spirit itself, by which those who 
claimed to be his partisans were no less animated than those who claimed to be his friends.” 

The opinion that Paul’s language was intended to designate parties actually existing in the Church is confirmed by the 
testimony of Clement, who in writing to this same Church less than fifty years later says, “ The blessed Paul wrote to you 
about himself and Cephas and Apollos, because, then as well as now, you formed parties.” See Stanley. Among Ameri- 
can commentators Hodge and Barnes substantially agree with our Author. The former says, “The idea that the names of 
Paul and Apollos and Cephas are used figuratively, when other teachers were really intended, is 80 unnatural and has 80 
little to sustain it that it is now almost universally repudiated. 

“Jt is a remarkable fact,” writes Stanley, “that the factions, once so formidable, have never been revived. Never has 
any disruption of the unity of Christianity appeared of equal importance; never has any disruption which once appeared 
of importance (with the exception, perhaps, of the Paschal controversy) been so completely healed.”’) 


——— 


νόου ἢ ὐΝἷἷ 


2 2. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. 11 








for marriage; as though celibacy were an evil and a disgrace. In reference to such a tendency 
the Apostle insisted only that in view of “the present distress” believers hold themselves free 
from earthly ties, and that in forming new connexions they take care to keep within the circle 
of Christian fellowship (chap. vii.). 

A further antagonism of a similar kind was called for by the same cause in relation to the 
use of meat that had been offered unto idols (viii. ff.). On this point, likewise, two parties were 
formed; one strict, and the other liberal-minded. On the part of the former, there was a clinging 
to the external aspects of the act, or at least some remains of heathenish superstition in regard’ 
to an actual objective influence exerted by the idols upon the meats offered to them. On the 
part of the latter there was evinced indeed a more correct insight into the merits of the subject; 
but this was accompanied by an overweening pride, and a lack of self-denying love, which was 
shown in the reckless use they made of their liberty, by reason of which some were scandalized,. 
and others were led to participate in heathen ceremonials in a manner utterly inconsistent with. 
the proper observance of the most sacred feast of Christian worship. This lack of knowledge im: 
regard to the privileges belonging to a Christian, as well as the lack of consideration and self-denial: 
towards others, were alike indications of the “yet carnal” mind. In the one case faith was not- 
live enough to beget a liberalizing knowledge; in the other case, it was not strong enough to: 
produce brotherly love. 

This same lack of decorum as well as of brotherly love, was also to be seen in the sphere of 
public worship (chap. xi.); the former, in that the women violated the custom, prevalent in the 
Churches of God, of appearing in the congregation veiled; the latter, in that the love-feasts to» 
which the Lord’s Supper was attached, were celebrated in a manner entirely at variance with: 
the design for which they were instituted, which was to awaken and preserve a just sense of the: 
unity and equality of all believers in Christ, for here the rich separated themselves from: their 
poorer brethren, and kept the portions they brought, aside for their own use, so that the affluence 
of the one class and the poverty of the other were exhibited in painful contrast. 


The “yet carnal” mind was furthermore manifest in relation to the spiritual gifts which 
abounded in the Church. There was a lack both of correct inszght into the ground and purpose: 
of these gifts and of determination to maintain a constant reference to this ground’ and ‘purpose, 
in the use of them. In other words, there was wanting an humble recognition of dependence 
upon the one God, and Lord, and Spirit, for the existence of these gifts, and also a sincere and’ 
loving endeavour to employ them for the furtherance of the interests of the Church. Besides, 
there was mingled with this a foolish pride at the possession of such. gifts, and! an.unreasoning, 
over-estimate of those in particular which had in them something remarkable.and astonishing, 
such as the gift of tongues. The ability to speak what was incomprehensible, except through 
‘an interpreter, in a state of ecstasy, was more highly prized than: the-ability to prophesy, even: 
though this was better fitted for edification. It was alsoa token: of carnal immaturity, that 
they were indisposed to repress the impulse to prophesy when: it was operating to disturb the 
order of the congregation, and to hinder edification. With this there was associated also a 
display of vanity on the part of women in their desire to imitate the men in speaking in an in- 
spired vein (chap. xil.—xiv.). 

In addition to all these erroneous moral tendencies, there existed also a theoretic error, 
(easily passing over, however, into one of practice) which resulted from an adherence to the old 
heathenish habits of thought. It was an aversion to the doctrine of the glorification of the 
body (cf. Acts xvii. 82). There were persons in the Corinthian Church who denied the possibi- 


Ἃ 


12 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


---- — 





lity of we resurrection of the dead, inasmuch as they could not see into the method of the pro- 
cess. (Chup. xv. 35). In this case they showed themselves guilty of gross ignorance, partly in 
relation to the consequences of such a denial (vv. 1-19), partly in relation to the whole system 
of God’s counsels and ways, of which the resurrection formed an important part (vv. 20-28), 
partly in respect to the practical significance of the resurrection (ver. 29), partly in respect to God 


and His power (ver. 34), and partly in regard to the development of the life in Christ; which was — 


in accordance with the analogies of the natural life, and with the precedent set by Christ hime 
self (ver. 35 ff). 


§ III. LITERATURE, 


Among the more general exegetical works on the New Testament, or on the Pauline epis. 
tles, must be mentioned first, the patristic commentaries of Curysosrom, Taroporet, THEOPHY- 
ract, and Orcumentus; then, those of the Reformers Cavin, Beza, Fuactvus, and others; then 
tiose subsequent to the period of the Reformation by Grorrus and his learned opponent 
Caxovius; and last of all, the later commentaries by Fuatr, Orsaausen, De Werte, Meyer, 
Borcer, Neanper, etc., and, as especially deserving of consideration, that by Ostanper (Stuttg. 
1858). With these we have compared also the Roman Catholic exposition of the two Epistles 
to the Corinthians by Bisprne (2d ed., 1863). Besides these, honorable mention must be made 
of ΜΈΠΤΑΝΟΤΗΟΝ (1 Cor., and a few chapters of 2d Cor.), W. Muscunus, Aretius, BuLLInGEr, 
Ses. Scumip, Moser, 8. J. Baumearren, Scuutz, Morus, Emmerzine, Krauss, HeypEnreicn 
(on 1st Cor.), and Brutrots. To these may be added the collective works: Cririct Sacrr; 
Poor's Synopsis ; Wour’s Cure ; SrarKe’s Bibel- Werk ; the Bertensurcer Brexe; C. H. Riecer's 
Observations on the New Testament, which naturally connect in spirit with the excellent Gnomon 
of Bence; Gossner’s Spirit of the Life and Doctrine of Jesus Christ in the New Testament (1818) 
drawn for the most part from the Berlenburger Bible and from Zinzendorf; Hrusner’s Practica. 
Exposition of the New Testament (1858); W. Ἐς Besser’s Bible-Lessons (8th vol. 1862). Impor- 
tant aids to the exposition of these Epistles are furnished by the treatises on the Apostolic 
period (Hess, Neanver, Scnarr, Lecuter, Lanes, Turerscn, and others); upon the Apostolic 
and Pauline doctrine (Messner, Lurrerseck, Ustert, Dinner); upon the New Testament The- 
ology (Cur. Scumip and others). Comp. also Baur, The Apostle Paul (2d ed. by Zeller, 1867, 
2 vols.], and from the earlier time Srorr’s Notitie Historice (in his Opuscula). 

[Among the English and American works, those possessed of distinguished merit are, H, 
Hammonv’s Paraphrase of the New Testament, with Notes (1684); M. Henry's Lxposition of tha 
Old and New Testament (begun in 1704); D. Wurrsy’s Paraphrase and Commentary on the New 
Testament (1726); Tuos. Scorr’s Commentary on the Bible (1821); A. CrarKe’s Commentary on 
the Bible (1826); Buoomrrenp’s Commentary on the New Testament, and Critical Digest (1826) ; 
Barnes’s Commentary on the New Testament (1837); Hopar’s Commentary on the Corinthians 
(1862); Axrorp’s Greek Testament (5th ed. 1865); Srantey’s Epistles of St. Paul to the Corin- 
thians (3d ed. 1865); F. W. Ropertrson’s Sermons on St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians 
{1860); Worpswortn’s Greek Testument with Notes (4th ed. 1866); besides The Life and Epis- 
siea of St. Paul by ConyBeare and Howson (1853, and several editicns since in England and 
avverics) ; Eaptr’s Paul the Preacher (1860); and Howson’s Hulsean Lectures on St. Paul, for 
HK | 


lan 


THE 


FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTIANS. 


41. ITS GENUINENESS, 


The genuineness of this Epistle is undoubted. The witnesses for it stretch far back into the 
remotest antiquity ; and among the earliest are Polycarp, Ignatius, Clemens Romanus, Irenzus, 
Athenagoras, and Clemens Alexandrinus, [Lardner adds Barnabas and Hermas]. 

[As specimens of the testimony they adduce, take the following furnished by Lardner and 
Alford: 

Barnabas (A. Τὴ. 71) has the following evident allusions to 1 Cor. iii. 16, in his Epistle ch, 
vi: “The habitation of our heart is an holy temple to the Lord;” and in ch. xvi. “God truly 
dwells in our house, that is, in us. This is the spiritual temple built unto the Lord.” 

Clemens Rom. (A. D. 96) in his Epistle to the Corinthians, ch. xlvii. writes: “Take into 
your hands the Epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle. What did he write unto you at the 
first, in the beginning of the Gospel? Verily he did by the Spirit admonish you concerning 
himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because that even then ye did form parties.” And then we 
have citations in xlviil. from 1 Cor. x. 24; in xxxvii. from 1 Cor. xii. 12; in xlix. from 1 Cor. 
xii. 4; in xxiv. from 1 Cor. xv. 20. 

Hermas (A. Ὁ. 100) in Sim. v. 27 alludes to 1 Cor. vii. 11, “If therefore a man or woman 
perseveres in anything of this kind and repents not; depart from her, and live not with her; 
otherwise thou also shalt be partaker of her sin. But it 15 therefore commanded, that both the 
man and the woman should remain unmarried, because such persons may repent.” 

Ignatius (A. D. 107) in his Epistle to the Ephesians ὃ 2. quotes from 1 Cor. i. 10, “That in 
one obedience ye may be perfectly joined together [in the same mind, and in the same judgment, 
and may all speak the same thing of the same thing”"]. And in ibid. ὃ 18 from 1 Cor. i. 
18; in Epistle to Rome @5 from 1 Cor. iv. 4; in Epistle to the Magnes 2 10 from 1 Oor. v. 7; 
in Epistle to Ephesians from 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10, ete. ἢ 

Polycarp (A. D. 108) in Epistle to the Phil. ch. xi. quotes from 1 Cor. vi. 2, “Do you not 
know that the saints shall judge the world? as St. Paul teaches. Another citation in ch. v. from 
1 Cor. x1. 9. 

Further illustration might be given, but the above are sufficient to show the strength of 
the evidence. Those interested in prosecuting the investigation are referred to Lardner and 
Tregelles and Alford]. 

The internal characteristics also allow no uncertainty on the subject. The boldest criticism 
of our day, that of the Tiibingen school, has suffered it to go unchallenged, and puts these two 
Epistles beside those to the Romans and the Galatians as the genuine writings of St. Paul. 

[The best exposition of these internal evidences is given us by Paley in his Horx Pauline, 


ch. ili. Among these may be mentioned a minuteness of detail and characterization, also in- 
cidental allusions and omissions, such as could hardly be looked for in a forged document; and 





1 The part included in brackets Hefele rejects as spurious. 13 


14 INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
ee Se 
besides these numerous close, yet undesigned coincidences between the statements in the Epise 
tle and portions of the narrative in the Book of Acts. 
But aside from and beyond all these evidences is the style and tone of the Epistle itself. 
Its every line is instinct with the spirit of Paul. All the features of his great and unique charac: 
ter are too sharply impressed upon it to allow of any hesitation as to the authorship]. 


(21. PLACE AND TIME OF WRITING. 


The subscription purports that this Hpistle was written at Philippi. But this is directly 
contradicted by Paul’s own statement in xvi. 8, where he says that he would “Tarry at Ephesus 
until Pentecost.” Michaelis thinks that the mistake must have arisen from a mis-appre- - 
hension of διέρχομαι in xvi. 5, which being read in the present was made to mean “I am now 
passing through Macedonia,” thus indicating his whereabouts at the time of writing, All 
modern critics agree in taking xvi. 8 as deciding the point of place. 

As to the time, there is not the same unity of opinion, though Conybeare and Howson assert 
that “its date can be fixed with more precision than any other.” Kling says “about the close 
of Paul’s well-nigh three years’ residence at Ephesus, some time before Pentecost, and shortly 
before Easter, after he had sent away Timothy and Erastus (iv. 17; Acts xix. 22), and had him- 
self resolved to go through Macedonia and Achaia. (Acts xix. 21; 1 Cor. xvi. 8).” The editor 
of the second edition singularly adds, without any apparent sense of the contradiction, “ that it is 
not to be put before the month Tisri (Sept.), the beginning of the Jewish year, since the Apostle 
must certainly have followed the Jewish reckoning, and not the Attic-Olympian.” Whatever 
may have been meant by this, Kling’s view as to the season of the year (Spring) is accepted by 
the majority of recent critics. (MryER, DE Wxerrr, Worps., AuF., Hopes, efc.) 

But not so agreed are they as to the year itself. Kling puts it at A. D. 58, and so also 
Meyer. De Wette says 57 or 58. Alf: “It is almost certain that it was written before Pente- 
cost A. Ὁ. 57;” and so also Pearson, Mill and Wordsworth. According to Lardner’s computa- 
tion it was in the year 56. This was also the opinion of the French commentators, L’ Enfant and 
Beausobre. This variation of two years is however a very slight one. The judgment of critics 
preponderates in favor of the year 57]. 


2 III. THE OCCASION AND DESIGN OF THE EPISTLE. 


From what has been said in the general Introduction it is easy to infer what prompted the 
Apostle to write to the Corinthians, and what object he had in view. The moving cause was 
the whole condition of the church as unfolded in this Epistle. And in view of the evils which 
had broken out among them he felt constrained to attempt their suppression without delay, and 
that, too, by writing, as he had good reason for not wishing to defer his work in Macedonia 
The chief points he aimed at was to restore harmony, repress inordinate license, correct errors of 
faith and practice, and confirm them in their allegiance to their Divine Master. [To these we may 
add, to reéstablish his own authority and vindicate his own character and style of preaching from 
the attacks of enemies who had crept into the church during his absence, and assailed his Apos- 
tleship]. 

Already before this had he learned of some of the excesses into which several of the converts 
had fallen, and in an Epistle (now lost) had warned them against keeping company with fornica- 
tors, and urged the expulsion of such members from their cbmmunion. (1 Cor. v. 9, 11), And 
now again he had received further information, through persons arrived from Corinth, of the 
party-strifes which had sprung up among them. Besides this he had received a letter from the 
church (also lost) propounding various questions on points at issue in regard to which he was 
asked to decide. [Reason enough therefore was there for his writing; and from the abrupt man- 
ner in which he enters upon the case in hand, after his calm opening, which is not without indi- 
cations of restrained feeling, we see how thoroughly his whole soul was roused to his work, and 
how strongly he felt the necessity upon him for plain and decided utterances. The result was an 
Epistle which forms one of the most important portions of Sacred Writ. Thus man’s evil occa 
sions are God’s grandest opportunities for good]. 


@ V. CONTENTS. 15 





¢ IV. ITS STYLE. 

[On this point we can do no better than give entire the statements of Alford in his Intro« 
duction. 

“This Epistle ranks perhaps the foremost of all as to sublimity and earnest impassioned elo- 
quence. Of the former, the description of the simplicity of the Gospel in ch. ii—the concluding 
apostrophe of ch. 111. from ver. 16 to the end—the same in ch. vi. from ver. 9 to the end—the 
reminiscence of the shortness of the time ch. vii. 29-31—the whole argument in ch. xv. are ex- 
amples unsurpassed in Scripture itself; and of the latter ch. iv. 8-15, and the whole of ch. ix., 
while the panegyric of love in ch, xiii. stands a pure and perfect gem, perhaps the noblest assem- 
blage of thoughts in beautiful language extant in this world. About the whole Epistle there is 
a character of lofty and sustained solemnity, an absence of tortuousness of construction, and an 
apologetic plainness, which contrast remarkably with the pcrsonal portions of the second 
Epistle.” 

And all these qualities shine forth unconsciously, without effort, while in the earnest and 
direct prosecution of his purpose, yea, while entirely repudiating all attempts at rhetoric as ut- 
terly inconsistent with the simplicity of the Gospel. Here we have a beautiful illustration of the 
unconscious character of the truest eloquence. 

“No Epistle,” Alf. proceeds, ‘“‘raises in us a higher estimate of the varied and wonderful 
gifts with which God was pleased to endow the man whom he selected for the Apostle of the 
Gentile world, or shows us how large a portion of the Spirit, who worketh in each man severally 
as He will, was given to him for our edification, The depths of the spiritual, the moral, the in- 
tellectual, physical world are open to him. He summons to his aid the analogies of nature. He 
enters minutely into the varieties of human infirmity and prejudice. He draws warning from 
the history of the chosen people; example from the Isthmian foot-race. He refers an apparently 
trifling question of costume to the first great proprieties and relations of Creation and Redemp- 
tion. He praises, reproves, exhorts, and teaches. [He is tender, sarcastic, ironical!, Where he 
strikes, he heals. His large heart holding all, when he has grieved any, he grieves likewise; 
where it is in his power to give joy, he first overflows with joy himself. We may form some idea 
from this Epistle—better perhaps than from any one other, because this embraces the widest range 
of topics,—what marvellous power such a man must have had to persuade, to rebuke, to attract 
and fasten the affections of men.” 


@ V. CONTENTS. 


The main thought of this Epistle is to be seen in the object aimed at (2 3); its organic un- 
folding in the General Introduction in the development we have given of the history of the 
Church (@ 2). 

The entire contents of the Epistle revolve round the one purpose of leading the Corinthian 
Church to realize its true idea, and to set aside all those faults and defects in knowledge and 
practice which obstructed its proper growth. 

I. To this end, after the benediction connected with the address, the Apostle first alludes 
to the good beginning which the Corinthians had, on the whole, made in a sound church life, 
thankfully acknowledging the divine grace which had been vouchsafed to them in this respect, 
and their spiritual good estate as established therein. To this he adds the hope, grounded 
upon the truth of God, that they would continue steadfast unto the end (vv. 4-9). 

II. From this he turns to reprove their defects and discords of which he had been informed, 
first, by word of mouth from members of the Church, and then by letters of inquiry sent to 
him touching these things. 

A. These defects were, first, a lack of sound Christian community of feeling. 

1. As it respects the position of Church members towards Christ and his organs (i. 11, 
ff-iv.). He begins with rebuking the party spirit which was manifested towards himself, who 
had given no occasion for it, and towards Apollos; mainly in so far as this grew out of an 
inordinate estimate of human wisdom, learning and eloquence, an estimate which was wholly 


16 INTRODUCTLON TO THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





inconsistent with the plan of salvation, with the character of those called to participate in it, 
and with the style of that preaching which was to lay the foundation of the Christian life. (i. 17- 
ii. 5.). This preaching, however, he maintains, involved a high divine wisdom, which remained 
a closed mystery only to such as were not spiritual. (ii. 6 ff). This declaration he then ap- 
plies to the Corinthian converts as being not yet spiritual (iii. 1 ff.) and leads them to a right 


estimate of those who were reverenced as party leaders, and of their doings (5 ff.), warning them. 


at the same time against all destructive violations of the Church, which was the temple of 
God. (18 ff.). From this he proceeds to instruct them in regard to the lofty claims of Christians 
to the several means and instruments of salvation (21 ff.) and exhibits to them the proper 
standard for measuring the worth of Christ’s servants, a worth which was to be manifest in due 
time, and the manifestation of which therefore was to be waited for in suspense of judgment (iv. 
1 ff.). After he had thus set before them the contrast between their imagined self-sufficiency, 
and the actual condition of the Apostles (6 ff.) he passes from the severe into a paternal tone, 
points out the difference between a mere teacher and a spiritual father, and rebukes their arro- 
gance towards the latter, which seemed to proceed from the assumption that he was unable to 
punish (iv.). With this he proceeds to notice a further defect in Christian community of 
feeling. 

2. As it respects the discipline of unworthy and corrupt Church members (v.). 

He here insists upon the excommunication of a member who had disgraced the Church by 
gross immorality, and the toleration of whom hitherto was a just cause for deepest shame. In 
this connection he corrects a misunderstanding of what he had said in a former letter in regard 
to intercourse with immoral persons. 

3, As it respects the demeanor of Church members in their cwil relations toward each other 
(vi. 1 ff.). 

He rebukes the practice of Christians going to law with each other before heathen tri- 
bunals, especially when they were in the wrong, since unrighteousness belongs to the sins which 
exclude from God’s kingdom, and from which therefore they as Christians had been purified. 

4. As it respects a becoming Christian deportment in the sexual relations as opposed to heath- 
enish fornication (vi. 12 ff.). 

That this practice was by no means one morally indifferent, is shown from the relation 
of the body to Christ as the head of the Church, from its character as a dwelling-place of 
the Holy Spirit, and from the price paid for its ransom. 

5. As it respects their views of marriage (the foundation of all social life), and the conduct of 
the several parties in this relation (vii-). 

One inquiry in the letter of the Church had touched upon the relations of the marriage and 
the celibate state. Marriage and the bed undefiled he advised as a safeguard against fornication 
and as a relief to incontinence. Otherwise, to remain single were a noble thing (ver. 1ff.). But 
the dissolution of existing marriage relations is discountenanced except in cases where the unbe- 


lieving party insisted upon it (ver. 10 ff). The general rule laid down is for a person to abide’ 


in the condition wherein he is called (ver. 17 ff.). But the unmarried are advised to remain as 
they are, both on account of the existing distress which demanded an entire freedom of the spirit 
in regard to all possession and enjoyments, and for the sake of a more entire devotion to the 


Lord and His will. Nevertheless, the contracting of marriage is not condemned as sinful, - 


and in some cases is approved (ver. 25 ff.). 
6. As it regards the conduct of the strong and liberal-minded towards the weak in things 
indifferent; that j is to say, a defect in self-denying love (vili.—x.). 


The discussion here, which was called forth by an inquiry about the eating of meat offered . 


unto idols, proceeds on the assumption, that mere knowledge without love, so far from furthering 
the life of the Church, only begets a corrupting pride (viii. 1 ff.). He then gives them to under- 
stand that an insight into the nothingness of gods, so called, was not so general as to divest all 
persons of a conscious relation to the idols in the eating of the meat offered to them. Hence 
to lead such persons to eat of this meat by the exercise of a liberty conformed to such an insight, 
when the mere eating was of no moral worth before God, was in fact a betrayal into sin, and so a 
beguiling to perdition. And this was entirely contrary to the love of Christ, who had made the 


Se oe ἢ 


ὃ Υ. CONTENTS. 17 











greatest sacrifice in their behalf (ver. 5 ff.). Here the Apostle shows them, by his own exam- 
ple, that the surrender of an acknowledged right for the sake of furthering the cause of Christ 
was the proper boast of the Christian, and the condition of obtaining an indestructible crown, 
(ix.). He then warns them against all false confidence, in supposing those once received into the 
communion of God’s people, and into a participation of the means of grace, could ever fail, while 
at the same time he points them comfortingly to the faithfulness of God in keeping them from 
temptation (x. 1 ff.); dissuades them from participating at idol altar-feasts, as inconsistent with 
a participation in Christian solemnities (ver. 14 ff.) and finally exhorts them to follow the rule of 
love, and do what was for the glory of God. (ver. 25 ff.). 

7. As it respects their deportment at the assemblies of the Church. 

_ a. Of women in the matter of dress. He pronounces the covering of their head in 
public as a custom that was in accordance with nature and suited to the posi- 
tion ordained of God for woman, while that of being uncovered was more suited 
to the man (xi. 1-16.). 

ὃ. Of the rich towards the poor in the observance of the Lord’s Supper. He reproves 
the custom of the two classes separating at the love feasts, as contrary to the na- 
ture of the institution, and calculated to draw down upon it the judgment of 
God, because of the unworthy communion it vccasioned (ver. 17 ff.). 

ce. Of the Church generally, and of those endowed with spiritual gifts in their im- 
proper estimate and use of these gifts (xu. to xiv.). 

a In respect to these, he exhibits, first, their foundation and object and hence 
their unity in manifoldness, as designed for mutual helpfulness, suitably to 
the organic character of the Church (xii.). 

β He next shows the measure of their worth and the rule of their use, viz.: 
Love which is described according to its qualities, and recommended and 
praised above all transient gifts, because of its eternal duration. 

y Finally, he compares the gifts of prophecy and of speaking with tongues in 
respect to their worth, as measured by their fitness to edify the Church; and 
sets forth the rules that are to regulate their use in accordance with their de- 
sign and with what is seemly for the Church of God. (xiv.). 

To these defects in true Christian community of feeling, there is added, still. 

B. A defect in doctrinal knowledge and of steadfastness in respect to the article of the re- 
surrection of the dead (xv.). 

On this point the Apostle teaches them, 1. How the possibility of this fact is essentially 
presupposed in the resurrection of Christ, that well attested event on which the faith and hope 
of Christians rest (vv. 1-19); 2. What position it occupies in. the carrying out of God’s plan 
of salvation, (ver. 20 ff.); 3. What practical consequences its denial involves; 4. How the ob- 
jections against it arising from its mode, and from the nature of the resurrection body, are 
groundless and irrational, (ver. 35 ff.); and 5. How it will be with those who survive at the 
moment of Christ’s appearing (ver. 51 ff.). 

III. The concluding portion of the Epistle (xvi.) is made up of instructions in regard to the 
the collection for the Christians at Jerusalem; of intimations in regard to his approaching visit; 
and hints respecting the treatment they were to give his friends and helpers; and, finally, of 
greetings and parting wishes accompanied with earnest exhortation. 

Obs. The survey above given of the contents of this Hpistle finds its proper supplement in 
the attempt made in Introd. 3 2. to refer back all its faults to the lingering carnality of the Co- 
rinthian Church. These are but the various points of view from which to consider and expound it. 

How nearly the contents of this Apostolic letter touch our Christendom, and what practical 
bearing it has for us is well expressed by old Hepner in the following powerful language, 
which we may well consider (comp.) Starx, Ernu.? 12 “A Christianity decayed in all the duties 
of life and its several relations, may see itself distinctly mirrored in this Epistle, and may per- 
ceive how, with the Corinthians, all their mistakes and idle fancies about the nature of true 
blessedness have not yet entirely died out. How sadly is the Church of the saints still 


tormented with rationalizing spirits, and with falsely-famous worldly-wise ones, who intrude 
2 


18 INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 





upon others that are truly spiritual their own self-coined conceits and rules! To what extent 
are multitudes still corrupted from the simplicity of the faith! How boldly do people judge of 
spiritual things according to the crooked standards of a carnal or political wisdom! How con- 
ceited and puffed up are many pastors and teachers through their vain learning! How merciless 
toward the weak! How tender in rebuking distinguished sinners! How common has fornica- 
tion become! How grossly and wickedly do many conduct themselves both in married and 
single life! How careless are people about winning their neighbor’s regard! How often is the 
Lord’s Supper dishonored and disgraced, as if it were a common meal, by the unbelieving, the 
hypocritical, and the godless! And such, forsooth, will still pretend to be Christians! God grant 
that by the frequent perusal of this Epistle, yea, of the entire Scriptures, they may reform betimes! 
Furthermore, we may learn from this Epistle: 1. In Paul, his love and patience as evinced to- 
wards the faults of the Corinthians; his wisdom and foresight in convicting and reproving; his 
zeal against open offenders; his care that a great evil might be warded off in season. 2. But in 
the Corinthians, (a) How a good beginning may not hold out, and how easily persons may be 
turned from the simplicity which is in Christ, if they do not keep a wakeful watch over them- 
selves; (ὁ) What damage is done, if a person yields too much to his own reason, or relies on his 
secular wisdom, or allows himself to be ensnared by the artful words of carnal learning. 3. What 
a blessing it is to have a faithful teacher. 4. How necessary and useful church discipline is. 5. 
How difficult it is steadfastly to refrain from sins to which a, person has been accustomed, and 
which he formerly considered not sinful. 6. How high an estimate should be put upon every 
believer, and what care should be taken not to offend the weak. 7. That Satan regards nothing 
as too sacred to be turned by him to the advantage of his kingdom and to the injury of Christ’s 
Church, as (6. g.) spiritual gifts. 8. How dangerous it is to err in fundamental truths and how 
necessary to instruct others concerning them.” 


a, 


COMMENTARY. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


FIRST DIVISION. 


THE GREETING; THANKS AND HOPE IN REFERENCE TO THEIR CHRISTIAN STATE 
IN GENERAL. 


I. Greeting. 


Cuapter I. 1-3. 


1 PaUvt, called! to be an apostle [a chosen apostle] of Jesus Christ through the will 
2 of God, and Sosthenes our [the] brother, Unto the church of God which is at Co- 
rinth,? to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be [chosen] saints, 


with all that in every place [om. in every 
3 our Lord, [in every place*] both theirs an 


ee) call upon the name of Jesus Christ 


ours: Grace be unto you, and peace, from 


God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. 


1Ver.1—KAnros: called or chosen is wanting in many good authorities (A. D. E. etc.) These, however, are not 
sufficient to warrant its omission, since it is more likely that the word was omitted as superfluous, in consequence of 
διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ (as it is not found in like connection in 2 Cor.i.1; Eph.i.1; Col.i.1; 2 Tim. i.1), than that 


it should have been inserted from Rom.i.1. (Cod. Sin. has it. 
This is the nearest equivalent in English. 


translate kAyn Tos asa verbal adjective “ chosen.” 


In the text we follow the version of our author and 
“Called” would be more 


correct; but this word is appropriated to another meaning, and would therefore be ambiguous. ] 

2 Ver. 2.—[Our author inserts the clause “which is at Corinth” after “Christ Jesus,” an unnatural order, authorized 
by B. D. E. F. G. It. and which he vindicates on the ground that it were more natural to suppose that the order of the 
Received Text was a supposed improvement by transcribers, than that the clause in question should have been placed 


by design or error in those manuscripts after “sanctified in Christ Jesus.” 


The valuable Cod. Sin., however, agrees 


with the Received Text, and we adhere to this against the decision of Alford, Stanley or others. ] 
3 [We here conform to the unquestioned order of the Greek text, which alone yields the true meaning.—See below.] . 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 1-3. These opening verses, according 
to ancient custom, combine to present in advance 
the address and greeting; that is, the designa- 
tion of the parties concerned in their mutual re- 
lations, and likewise the benediction. 

Ver. 1. Paul.—Concerning his person and his- 
tory, his importance to the Church and his la- 
bors, consult the general introduction to these 
Epistles [also Herzog’s Real. Ency. art. Paul. 
Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, do. Kitto’s Bible 
Ency. do. Besser, ‘‘Paul the Apostle.” Eadie, 
‘““Panl the Preacher.” Howson, ‘* Hulsean 
Lectures,” for 1862. A. Monod, ‘Five Dis- 
courses on St. Paul.’ Ld. Lyttleton, ‘‘On the 
Conversion of St. Paul.” Neander, ‘Planting 
and Training,” etc. ] ἣ 


A chosen Apostle of Jesus Christ, by 
the will of God.—The ordinary rendering, 
‘called to be an Apostle,” does not give suffi- 
cient prominence to the leading thought here, 
which is shown by the order of the words to lie in 
‘Apostle.’ The sense is,—an Apostle by virtue of 
his calling; and this calling was that given him 
by Christ (Acts ix. 22-26), having for its deeper 
ground the will of God (comp. Gal. i. 15 ff.). 
Hence, neither of these designations is superflu- 
ous. The fact of ‘‘being called” is insisted on 
in contrariety to everything like arbitrary as- 
sumption of honor, or unwarrantable intrusion 


« Καλεῖν: to 681], like x55 is used 


ἡ τὰ δ Ἢ 
to denote the way in which God specially appoints 
men to any particular end.” Neanper. And 
this was a matter which, in view of the parties 
at Corinth who refused to acknowledge Paul’s 


(19) 


into office. 


20 





apostleship, and sought to put him below the 
twelve, directly called by Christ when on earth, 
it was in point to bring prominently forward; 
and no less important was it to show that this call- 
ing came through (dca) the Supreme Will. And 
there was the greater necessity for this, inasmuch 
as the office of which he claimed to be the bearer 
was highest in the divine economy. It was that of 
an ambassador of Jesus Christ, whose business 
it was to represent his Master, whose words and 
acts were to be regarded as Christ’s words and 
acts, the honoring or contemning of whom was 
to be looked upon as the honoring or contemning 
of Christ, who, as Christ’s commissioner, ap- 
pointed to organize and govern the Church 
throughout the world, wielded an all-embracing 
power, and exercised a far-reaching authority, 
and who agreeably with such an appointment and 
such plenitude of authority was endowed with a 
wealth of spiritual gifts, such as is ordinarily dis- 
tributed among several persons in a less degree.* 

And Sosthenes the brother.—Although 
conscious of his high and well established posi- 
tion, he nevertheless does not present himself be- 
fore the Church alone; but he takes into com- 
pany one who officially stood far below him. 
Him, however, he designates as an equal—as a 
brother both to himself and the Church, in the 
unity of Christian faith and hope. ‘The disposi- 
tion on the part of Paul to send out his Epistles in 
the name of one or more of the brethren happen- 
ing to be with him (Gal. i. 2), may be taken 
either to imply that the persons mentioned had 
aided in the upbuilding of the churches concerned, 
or as an expression of their perfect agreement 
with what he wrote. It certainly is, at any rate, 
a testimony to that fellowship in the Spirit, which 
Paul so often inculeated, and which he was 
ever diligent both to cultivate in himself and 
to inculcate upon his readers.” BuRGER. Whe- 
ther this Sosthenes was the ruler of the syna- 
gogue mentioned in Acts xviii. 17,—-supposing 
him to be then already inclined to the cause 
of Christ, in case it was by the Jews that he 
was beaten, or that he was violently opposed to 
this cause, in case he was beaten by Greeks, 
(the readings which indicate the one or the 
other are neither of them original),—cannot be 
accurately ascertained, In any case, he must 
have been known and esteemed in the Church, so 
that it was not without its influence with them 
that he expressed his assent to the contents of the 
letter, and represented them before Paul. That 
he must have written the letter himself under 
Paul’s dictation, as some suppose (Billroth, Hodge) 
(comp. xvi. 21), does not necessarily follow from 
this connection. Perhaps we might infer that he 
had been an official assistant of Paul; but even 
this is not expressly denoted bythe term ‘brother.’ 

Ver. 2. Names and characterizes the party 
written to.—Unto the Church of God.— 
‘The congregation,’ or, ‘the Church of God’ is the 
Old Testament designation of Israel as a divinely 
gathered people. It means a people assembled 
before God and for God. The derivation of the 











ΓΚ On the nature and extent of the apostolic office, con- 
sult articles undér the word “Apostle,” in Kitto’s Enc., 2d 
ed.; Smith’s Bib. Dict.; Herzog’s Real. Enc.; also, Owen’s 
Works, vol. iv. p. 438-445; Schaff, Hist. of Ap. Ch., Book ini. 
chap. 2; Conybeare and Howson, Life of St. Paul, ch. xiii.; 
Litton, The Church of Christ, Book ii., Part ii. ch. 1.) 


ee π΄ π΄Π-΄΄ππΠΠ’ΠἕΠ3Π3ΠἷΞἷΞ“π΄ΞΠΠΠπΠ..΄ὦἷΠ“.ν.-- τ΄’ Ὁ. τᾷ 0... ππΠΠ-.οϑοτει͵;τοτιϑἍ.σ  τ͵᾽ὐςξς-------ὄ.----------- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ἌΝ ππππσσ. Ὁ 


word ecclesia points out the mode of its gather. 
ing. It was by means of a ‘calling,’—a spiritual 
instrumentality. Hence its members are desig- 
nated as ‘‘the called.” In this a personal inde- 
pendence is presupposed. Salvation is offered, 
not enforced, and it is shared only by those 
who voluntarily accept and enter into it. Τοῦ 
ϑεοῦ : of God—Gen. of possession. The Corinthian 
Church is hereby emphatically declared to belong 
not to any human leader, but to God alone. The 
Church is His.—Which is at Corinth [The 
local designation of the Church. Geographical 
divisions are in the Church the only ones recog- 
nized in the New Testament, and the Church 
in one place or city is always spoken of as a unit. 
Though consisting of one or more distinct con- 
gregations, it was regarded as an organic whole 
under one general superintendency. 1t was other- 
wise when a province was in view, e. g., the 
churches of Asia.—*‘Church at Corinth! that 
wicked city! what a joyful and striking para- 
dox.” Bengel.]|—to them that are sancti- 
fied in Christ Jesus.—By this the Church 
of God is distinctly characterized in its mem- 
bers as Christian. It is composed of persons 
who are sanctified, ¢. e., separated from the mass 
of sinful humanity, the world, and devoted to the 
exclusive service of the true God [and whose 
guilt has been expiated by an atonement. Both 
ideas, those of consecration and expiation, are 
included in the word ἁγιάζειν: to sanctify]. This 
is not to be understood in a simply legal or theo- 
cratic sense (as in the case of the Jews, who 
were termed a holy nation because of their de- 
scent from Abraham and their divine govern- 
ment); nor yet ina purely objective sense, as im- 
plying the mere imputation of holiness; but in a 
real sense, as being the result of the operation of 
the Holy Ghost (comp. vi. 11; 1 Pet.i.2). Yet this 
inward appropriation of salvation is not on this 
account to be considered as complete, but only as 
begun in its informing principle, and as existing 
in a germ which may be developed in various 
degrees. 

In Christ Jesus.—These words denote the 
ground or soil whereon those who are sanctified 
stand, and from which they derive the power of 
sanctification. It is Jesus Christ, into whose 
fellowship they have entered by faith and bap- 
tism (comp. Gal. iii. 26 ff.; Rom. vi. 3), [and 
who is the only centre and bond of union for the 
Church ]--called or chosen saints. This implies 
that they are consecrated to God and numbered 
among His peculiar people by virtue of a divine 
call, [‘‘effectual call as distinguished from a 
merely external invitation.” Hopax] (comp. Rom, 
x. 14; ix. 24, ete.); hence, that they, as well as 
the Apostle on his part (ver. 1), were also in- 
debted for their high position to the Divine Will, 
which was made known to them in their call 
through the Gospel (Rom. x. 14; 2 Thess. ii. 
14). ‘*Paul here may have reminded them of 
their ‘calling’ as something which was alike 
for all, having in view already the parties whom 
he was soon to rebuke for giving undue promi- 
nence to the human instrumentality, and for in- 
sisting upon subjective diversities in a schisma- 
tic way.” Neanper. [‘It is not to be inferred 
from this that the Corinthian professors were 
all true believers, or that these terms express 





CHAP. 


I. 1-3. 21 


-_-Oreeeeeereeeee——————————eeeeoor eee 


nothing more than external consecration. Men 
are uniformly addressed in Scripture according 
to their profession.’”’ Hoper]. 

With all that call upon the name of our 
Lord Jesus Christ in every place.—There 
is a difference of opinion as to the connection of 
these words. They might be joined to those 
just preceding, 6. g., ‘who are called holy, as 
are all who, etc.’ So taken, they would serve to 
remind the Corinthian converts of their fellow- 
ship with Christians in all places. So Bengel. 
Or they may be construed as enlarging the circle 
of those whom Paul intends to address. The 
former construction would not be unsuitable, 
since it would furnish a fit antidote to the nar- 
row-minded tendency to division which showed 
itself in the church. But the latter is favored 
by the similar passage in 2 Cor. i. 1, which at 
the same time more exactly defines and explains 
the general statement we have here: ‘in every 
place.’ Then we should have immediately 
joined to this, as belonging to it, the closing 
words—both theirs and ours.—To connect 
these [as the E. V. does] with ‘‘our Lord,” g. d. 
‘‘their Lord and ours,” is hardly admissible from 
the order of the Greek text, and is also unsuita- 
ble, because in that case the word “‘our”’ as con- 
nected with ‘‘Lord”’ would be understood not 
simply of Paul or Sosthenes, but also of the re- 
cipients of the letter included with them as well. 
(Comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 18).—Referred to the daugh- 
ter churches of Corinth in Achaia, as suggested 
by 2 Cor. i. 1, these words yield the sense: ‘‘in 
every place which belongs as well to them—the 
Corinthians as the mother church—as also to us, 
the Apostle and his companions.”’ So construed, 
the Apostle will here be understood as, on the one 
hand, conceding fo them the right of the mother 
church, and impressing upon them the duty of 
taking a deeper interest in the daughter 
churches, and, on the other hand, as indicating his 
interest in these, and so winning them also to 
the reception of his doctrine and exhortation. 
[But is it not more natural to refer *‘theirs” to 
‘those who call upon, ete.,” and to include under 
“fours” both the parties writing and the parties 
written to? So Alford. Another interpretation 
has been proposed. ‘‘The Epistle is addressed to 
all Christians in Corinth and Achaia, wherever 
they might be. Every placeis at once theirs 
and ours—their place of abode and my place of 
labor.” See Hodge. ‘These words form a 
weighty and precious addition—made here 

‘doubtless to show the Corinthians that member- 
ship of God’s Holy Catholic Church consisted 
not in being planted or presided over by Paul or 
fvpollos or Cephas (or their successors), but in 
calling on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 
Alf. ]. 

ue call upon the name, οἰο.---ἐπικαλεῖσϑαι 
τὸ édvoua. By this is denoted, not the being 
called by the name of the Lord, asif the Greek 
verb were in the Passive, but, as every where in 
the Old and New Testament, the calling upon 
the name of the Lord, especially the invocation 
of His help as Lord. It is, accordingly, an act 
of divine worship, [and in a more extended 
sense, denotes a life of reverence towards God, 
and of habitual religious faith]. The term 
Lord, answering to the Hebrew my or 








708: Jehovah or Adonai, here applied to 


Christ, indicates His plenipotence and truth, 
which is more fully set forth in Matth. xi. 27; 
xxviii. 18; John xviii. 2; and which rests partly 
upon His original sonship and His mediatorial 
agency in the creation (viii. 6; Col. i. 16 ff; 
Heb. i. 2 ff.), and partly upon His redemptive 
office (vii. 22 ff.; Acts xx. 28; Tit. ii. 14).— 
The name indicates the being as revealed and 
known; hence the invocation presupposes faith— 
faith, preaching—and preaching, the word of God 
(Rom. x. 14 ff). Those who called upon the 
name of Christ formed a contrast with those who 
blasphemed this name among the Jews. (Luke 
xxiii. 89; 1 Tim. i. 18; Acts xxvi. 9; comp. 
chap. xxii. 16). This same thought lies at the 
foundation even in places where instead of a 
name we have a mere description. The name of 
Jesus Christ expresses what He is, His entire per- 
sonality together with His office and work. [On 
the import of names, especially as belonging to 
Deity: see Bush, Com. Ex. iii. 13.; Hengst. Com. 
Ps. viii. 2; ix. 12; Whately, Serm. Matth. i. 23]. 

Ver. 3. The benediction, which elsewhere 
among the Greeks, and twice also in the New 
Testament (Jas. i. 1; Acts xv. 23) is woven with 
the address into one sentence, is here peculiarly 
extended.—_Grace and peace constitute the sum 
total of Gospel blessings, the former being the 
ground and source of the latter. Χάρες pro- 
perly denotes that which begets joy, viz. favor, 
grace, kindly feeling. It may be regarded either 
as a quiescent trait, the mere outshining of an 
inward goodness or amiability; or as an energy 
put in active exercise for the welfare of others. 
Among the Greeks the word was used also in 
connections which we should deem immoral. 
But in the language of revelation it denotes 
that supreme love and self-devotion which was 
manifested in its most perfect form by the Son of 
God. It is what we, in respect of the unworthi- 
ness of the object, denominate grace, by which 
is meant sometimes the mere feeling of kindness 
in the heart, and sometimes the beneficent act 
which is its result, Here, indeed, it means the 
peace of forgiveness and reconciliation, corres- 


ponding to the Hebrew pibyy which includes 


the entire welfare of the individual both spiritual 
and physical, and the root of which is inward 
peace, the repose of the spirit in the sweet con- 
sciousness of being reconciled to God, and in the 
blessed assurance that we have God for our 
friend and have to expect from Him good alone. 
(Comp. Rom. viii. 1, 31-39). [‘*The wish of 
peace has a peculiar bearing here in view of the 
dissensions at Corinth.” Ols.]. 

From God our Father, and from the 
Lord Jesus Christ.—That this clause is not to 
be translated ‘‘from God the Father of us, and of 
the Lord Jesus Christ,” is clear from Gal. i. 8; 
not to say any thing of the impropriety of thus 
putting Jesus Christ in a subordinate position.— 
The co-ordination of Jesus with the Father is tu 
be explained on the ground that the office of 
mediating grace and peace-rests upon His divine 
sonship, and so upon His equality with God.— 
This is a truth already indicated in the appella- 


22 


tion “Lord,” and which is inferred from viii. 6, 
and from the whole Pauline system of doctrine. 
[‘* Here it is to be remarked, that God is called 
our Father and Christ our Lord. God, as God, 
has not only created us, but renewed and adopted 
us. Godin Christ has redeemed us. He is our 
owner and sovereign, to whom our allegiance is 
immediately due; who reigns in us, and rules 
over us, defending us from all our enemies. 
This is the peculiar form which piety assumes 
under the Gospel. All Christians regard God as 
their Father and Christ as their Lord.” Hodge]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. From the-fact that God our Father and the 
Lord Jesus Christ are exhibited tous as the 
common source or sum total of all the blessings of 
salvation, it is to be seen that the Apostle, even 
while subordinating Christ to God (111. 28; xi. 
8; xy. 28), yet maintains such a mediation 
through Christ of the Divine grace, and of the 
blessings flowing from it, as presupposes in Christ 
the Mediator a divine nature. How the two things, 
subordination and equality of substance, agree, 
is a problem for the science of Christoiogy. This 
is the mystery of love, which in the xather flows 
out in the fulness of the divine perfections; 
which in the Son keeps itself evermore as con- 
sciously dependent and recipient, and, accord- 
ingly, both thinks, purposes and does every thing 
with sole reference to the Father. 

2. The equality of Christ with God is also in- 
dicated by the calling upon the name of the Lord 
Jesus Christ. Both this invocation and that de- 
rivation of all the blessings of salvation from 
the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ con- 
jointly, can be made consistent with the Old 
Testament teaching respecting God, only on the 
supposition of the essential divinity of Jesus 
Christ and His true equality with the Father. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


1. The consciousness of being called to the min- 
istry through the will of God (ver.1) is: 1. the ground 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
in ta tl ea LI 







of our confidence in appearing before a Chris- 
tian congregation to instruct, exhort, reprove 
and comfort (comp. 2 Cor. iii. 4 ff.); 2. the spring 
of humble devotion to the service of the Lord, a, 
devoid of all arbitrary and self-willed activity, 
ὃ. and in every thing observant of the Master’s 
eye, and subject to His word; [8. an example 
for all engaged in any lawful vocation. The con=— 
sciousness of being called to our work in the 
providence of God is necessary for the sanctifi- 
cation of our labors, by imparting to them a no- 
ble aim, a right impulse, and a true courage to 
do and endure valiantly for God, our true Mas- 
ter, in all things appointed unto us. After Rob- 
ertson ]. 


2. The main features of a true church (ver. 2) 
are, 1. that it is an assemblage before and for 
God; 2. that it consists of such as are conse 
crated to God in Jesus Christ; 3. that it is thus 
consecrated through the mighty creative will of 
God; 4. that its members are such as call upon 
the name of the Lord Jesus Christ; [5. that these 
things may exist in connection with many glaring 
faults in true professing believers, and with | 
many false professions of faith, which yet do not 
necessarily vitiate the claim to be called a true 
church]. 

8, The proper fellowship between the office 
and the church rests, 1. in that the former works 
out for the latter the benefits of salvation which 
come from God and Jesus Christ in the way of 
blessing’; 2. in that the latter receives these 
benefits from the ministration of blessing with 
earnest and hearty desires, 


4, Vers. 2, 8: Besser:—How must the Apos- 
tolic greeting shame many corfgregations who 
assemble to hear this Epistle read, and yet come 
there with discordant sentiments and divided 
tongues! ‘The name ἐκκλησία: church,” says 
Chrysostom, ‘‘is a name not of separation, but 
of union and harmony.” 

[5. Ver. 2: Benaen :—The consideration of the 
church universal frees the mind from party bias, 
and sways it to obedience. ] 


Il. Gratitude and hope in respect to their Christian state in general. 


CuapTer I. 4-9. 


4 J thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is [was'] given 

5 you by [in: é&] Jesus Christ; That in every thing ye are [were] enriched by [in] him, 

6 in all utterance, and in all knowledge; Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed 

7 in you: So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus 

8 Christ: Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day 

9 of our Lord Jesus Christ. God 7s faithful, by [through] whom ye were called unto the 
fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 


[* Ver. 4. 


δοθείσῃ: was given, viz., at the time of conversion]. 


CHAP. 





EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


This opening, in which the Apostle expresses 
his thanks to God for the abundance of spiritual 
gifts possessed by the Corinthian Church, and his 
hope in their steadfastness and further prosperity 
in all good, should by no means be regarded 
as a simple rhetorical capiatio benevolentiz, as a 
mere bit of flattery designed to win his readers, 
so that they might the better accept his subse- 
quent exhortations and rebukes, and keep them- 
selves well disposed in spite of the unpleasant 
things he-had to say, and submit to be the more 
readily guided to the ends he had in view. What 
Paul here says is preéminently the truth. It 
comes from his heart. He does feel a sincere joy 
that so much good exists in the church and that it 
affords such ground of hope for the future. Itisa 
conviction which proceeds from his fatherly dis- 
position (comp. iv.15). Nor are wetoregard it as 
any self-deception or fond fancy of his. For how- 
ever great may have been the faults of individuals, 
the work of Divine grace had nevertheless been 
begun in all the plenitude of spiritual gifts, and 
his confidence in the continued operation of the 
Lord confirming their hearts, and in the faith- 
fulness of God towards them, was verily well 
grounded. Both these things are presupposed in 
his exhortation and rebuke. First, objectively: 
in so far as the expectation of any good results 
from his efforts rested only upon the existence 
of some good already in the church and upon 
God’s faithfulness and codperation. Again, sub- 
jectively:'in so far as the acknowledgment of 
previous successes and the hope of yet greater 
ones, generally inspire confidence and render per- 
sons favorably disposed to receive exhortation and 
rebuke as given kindly and intelligently, and 
infuse into them courage to undertake the work 
of reform; and this courage is of the right kind 
since it refers all good back to God as the source. 
And in this style of address there is something 
more than cool human calculation. It is acting 
in perfect conformity with the true laws of the 
mind, and above all with the law of that love 
‘‘which believeth all things and hopeth all things,” 
but which nevertheless secures the same results 
that worldly prudence is wont to calculate for ina 
selfish way. ‘The Corinthian Church was well 
trained and instructed and established in the 
faith; but it was not yet entirely simple-minded 
and pure in heart; there was much worldly 
vanity and party spirit still among them. So in 
every church there is to be found a mixture of 
what is praiseworthy and blameworthy. The 
praise of the better class piques even the worse, 
and is a means of inciting them to merit that 
praise, too. And the reproof of the bad ought to 
affect the better class likewise, awakening in 
them regrets that there are such persons by 
their side and in their communion as deserve re- 
proof, and it should prompt them to remove the 
evil. Every church is one organic whole, by 
reason of which the several members exert 
an influence upon each other and share in that 
which others have and are.’’ Heubner, p. 213. 
“This introduction, breathing blessing and 
praise, gratitude and confidence, exhibits the 
spiritual shepherd in apostolic simplicity and 


I. 4-9. 23 





truth. All goodness in the church he denomi- 
nates a work of grace, and he sets in prospect the 
consummation of the salvation begun as only 
grace likewise, and he does it in a manner at 
once humbling and animating. He looks at the 
church in its germ, in the strength of its better 
elements which may be rendered a source of 
blessing to others, and so, wisely preparing the 
way, he passes over from the bright to the 
darker side.” Osiander. 

Ver. 4. I thank.—An expression of acknow- 
ledgment and joy towards God as the Author of 
all good.—My God.—As in Rom. i. 8 and else- 
where,—of course not in an exclusive sense, but 
as an ayowal of his own personal communion 
with God and direct interest in Him; a personal 
attestation of his religious position, without any 
sinister design, but yet in a manner calculated 
to elicit respect and confidence in what he is 
about to say.— Always.—This cannot mean 
that he was always engaged in audible thanks- 
giving, or that this feeling of gratitude was also 
definitely present in his consciousness; but only 
that he bore this church perpetually upon his 
heart with grateful emotions to God—a meaning 
which the word in the Greek also carries.—On 
your behalf for the grace of God.—The 
personal object for whom and the reason on ac- 
count of which the thanks were given. [ydprc: 
grace, the disposition in God, for χαρίσματα: the 
blessings flowing from it—‘‘a metonymy which 
has passed so completely into our common par- 
lance, as to be almost lost sight of as such,”— 
Alf. Wordsworth, however, distinguishes here, 
χάρισμα is a special gift to be used for general 


edification. χάρις is grace generally for personal 
sanctification. Tongues, miracles, healing are 
χαρίσματα. χάρις 15 givenin order that χαρίσματα 


may be rightly used.”].—Which was given 
you in Jesus Christ.—Comp. also ver. 2.— 
Christ is here regarded, in a sort, as the place, 
where the grace of God is manifested (comp. 2 
Cor. v. 19) so that he who enters there becomes 
partaker of it. But this entrance is faith, by 
which the believer is in Christ and comes into 
vital communion with Him. 

Ver. 5. Extends the thought and shows where- 
in the manifested grace consists.—That ye 
were enriched in him—i. e., as being in 
Christ and haying constant communion with Him; 
and this enriching is the work of God’s grace.— 
In every thing.—A general statement, which 
is at once more particularly defined and limited. 
—In all doctrine.—Thus ought λόγος to be 
translated with Luther [in which Calvin, Alf., 
de Wette, Billroth, Meyer concur, understanding 
by it: doctrine preached to the Corinthians], 
and not: ‘‘ utterance,” as though the reference 
were to powers of eloquence or the gift of tongues 
[so Bengel, Stanley and Wordsworth; ‘and 
which interpretation,’ Hodge says, “gives good 
sense and is the one generally adopted.” Meyer: 
‘¢ All manner of external endowments for speak- 
ing ;” excluding however any allusion to gift of 
tongues, as inconsistent with the subordinate 
value attached to this in chap. xiv. This view 
is sustained by xii. 8: 2 Cor. viii. 7; xi. 6. In 
this case γνώσις ; knowledge, would denote the 
inward endowment. The order of the words 
appears to support Kling’s view. ‘Truth 


24 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





preached, (i. ¢.) ‘doctrine,’ must precede ‘truth | of the gospel in the soul results in a rich unfold. 


>) 


apprehended,’ ἡ, 6. ‘knowledge.’ 
alogous passages in the two Epistles go to prove 
Meyer’s view and the correctness of the English 
version also].—In all knowledge.—By this 
he means: the general acceptance of the doc- 
trines that had been communicated to them on 
every side, and a comprehensive insight into 
their truth. This statement does not conflict with 
the fact of peculiar defects in individuals. 

Ver. 6. Further confirms and illustrates the 
foregoing. Inasmuch ε5---καϑώς: [not correla- 
tion: ‘‘according as,” but as in appended clauses 
denoting explanation, quoniam, si quidem, since. 
Winer’s Gr. tint. 8].—The testimony of 
Christ.—Christ may here be taken either as 
the subject, the one testifying, or as the object, 
the one testified of. The one does not exclude 
the other. In the former case the phrase would 
mean, the proclamation of the Divine plan of sal- 
vation in allits parts (its grounds, aims and re- 
lations; its beginning, mediation, execution and 
consummation), obtained by a direct insight into 
the heart of God, into His inmost thought and 
purpose (comp. Jn. i. 18; vi. 46). But in this 
testimony of Christ, which sounded forth from the 
Apostles also, and so included their preaching, 
there is involved also the other idea, Christ’s 
own personal testimony, and the testimony of 
His Apostles likewise, to His divine Sonship and 
His mediatoral office. It makes little difference 
whether we construe it in the one way or the 
other. [‘*The former is the higher and there- 
fore the better sense. It is good to contemplate 
the Gospel as that system of truth which the 
Eternal Logos or Revealer has made known.” 
Hopes. Yet, it must be said, usage favors the 
latter acceptation. ‘*The testimony of Christ” 
is the witness borne concerning Christ by His 
Apostles of which the New Testamentisthe record, 
and in this instance by Paul. So Caly., Alf., Stan., 
Meyer]. ‘That the word μαρτύριον, testimony, 
and not. διδασκαλία, instruction, is here chosen, 
does not rest upon a simple Hebraism, but is 
well explained onthe ground that the gospel has 
not to do first and primarily with a system of 
ideas, but with an announcement of facts, the 
power of which a person must experience in 
himself.” Neanprr. The same expression occurs 
in 2 Tim. i. 18.—was confirmed in you.— 
Others render: ‘was established among you’ 
(Mark xvi. 20; Rom. xv. 8; Heb. ii. 4), whether 
it be by signs and miracles or by extraordinary 
operations of the Gospel.—Riickert: ‘by its ef- 
fects on you.’ But this neither suits the connec- 
tion with what precedes, nor what is afterwards 
(ver. 7) mentioned as the result of it. The for- 
mer indicates that the testimony of Christ was 
confirmed in their hearts, inwardly rooted there. 
And this happens partly through a comprehen- 
sive knowledge, so that thus the words ‘‘in all 
knowledge”? would be further illustrated, and 
partly as its presupposed condition, inasmuch as 
it is effected by faith, which is the root of all 
knowledge, and is to be regarded as a becoming 
fixed and remaining steadfast in the truth. Re- 
specting their steadfastness in this respect see 
xvi, 1:2 Cor. i) 24. 

Ver. 7. The consequence.—So that ye come 
behind in no gift.—The deep and fixed rooting 





But the an-| ing of spiritual life, of which he now proceeds ἐσ 


speak. By “gift” we are to understand a result 
of the operation of divine grace. Rom. y. 16 
expresses by it the work of grace as a whole, 
Here we are to understand it of the particular 
operations by which the members of the Church 
were variously qualified to labor for the edifica- 
tion of the body of Christ, either by instruction, 
or exhortation, or rule, or service, inasmuch ag 
the native talents of individuals requisite for 
such labors are awakened and sanctified by di- 
vine grace (comp. xii.). When such talents fall 
within the sphere of moral effort, and are ex- 
ercised in furthering the welfare of the Church 
and in glorifying God, they acquire an ethical 
character, and the gifts appear as Christian vir- 
tues. That such were the gifts alluded to seemg 
to be intimated in what follows—Waiting for 
the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ.— 
This constant expectation of our Lord’s second 
coming (Rom. viii. 19 ete.), when He shall be re- 
vealed in his glory unto all (Col. iii. 4), is one of 
the characteristic features of primitive Chris- 
tianity (comp. Phil. iii. 20; 1 Thess. i. 10; Tit. 
ii. 18; 2 Tim. iv. 8). Hence the clause has been 
taken as a simple paraphrase of the word: 
Christians. But this is by no means allowable 
here.—The connection of this participial clause 
with the preceding one has been variously inter- 
preted. Luther somewhat loosely: ‘And are 
waiting,” ‘‘only waiting” in the sense, that they 
were all ready; in which sense we might trans-_ 
late it: ‘And can wait” or: ‘can comfortably 
wait;” But this would conflict with the entire 
contents of the Epistle. To take it as ironical, 
(Mosheim) in the way of a slant at their self- 
sufficiency, would be inconsistent with the 
friendly winning style of the introduction. And ~ 
no less so, to suppose that he intended to alarm, 
by the suggestion of a coming judgment (Chrysos- 
tom), or to rebuke the sceptics of whom mention 
is made in chap. xv. More correct it would 
be, undoubtedly, to adopt the closer connection 
and translate: ‘while ye are waiting,” or, ‘ye 
who are expecting,” etc. The train of thought 
is this, that they, in this state of waiting, did not 
cease to make advances in every Christian quali- 
fication. So considered, the fact of ‘not coming 
behind” obtains the sense of: not falling short 
from any lack of earnest moral endeavor. There 
was a self-cultivation on the part of the spiritually 
quickened in consequence of their establishment 
in the faith (ver. 6). [But it must be added also 
that in the very mention of their waiting atti- 
tude, a commendation is intended. For this very 
‘‘ waiting,” as Alford well says, was ‘‘the great- 
est proof of maturity and richness of the spiritual 
life; implying the coéxistence and coéperation 
of faith, whereby they believed the promise of 
Christ—hope, whereby they looked on to its ful- 
filment, and love, whereby that anticipation was 
lit up with earnest desire.” But it may be asked, 
Were the Corinthians looking for Christ’s second 
advent. as an event likely to oceur in their day, 
and which some of them might expect to witness? 
This question must be answered in the affirma- 
tive. As Trench has well remarked, “It is a 
necessary element of the doctrine concerning the 
second coming of Christ, that it should be possi- 





ee ee 


CHAP. I. 4-9. 25 





ble at any time.” And all the hints given us 
throughout the Epistles (comp. 1 Thess. iv. 13— 
νον Phil ms 2055 Wit a 18.. 2 Tim. iv8) 
show that the hope of seeing Christ appear; while 
yet in the flesh, was an influential and inspiring 
sentiment, pervading the whole early Church. 
It was a powerful motive to watchfulness and 
patient endurance. And that it should so operate 
was one design of the secrecy which veiled it. 
‘Tatet ultimus dies, ut observetur omnes dies” 
(Aug.). That such was the case with the Cor- 
inthians seems to be intimated in the use of the 
word expressive of their mental attitude, aexde vo 
μένους: waiting it out, as persons expecting to see 
what they are waiting for ].* 

The earnest endeavor of the Church (or at 
least its better portion, its kernel) just recognized, 
leads the Apostle, in spite of all existing defects 
in individuals, to cherish the hope which he ex- 
presses in 

Ver. 8. Who shall also confirm you.—To 
whom does the relative ‘‘who” refer? Most 


᾿ naturally to Christ, mentioned just before in ver. 


Lod 


7. But in this case it is remarkable that in the 
next clause instead of saying ‘‘in His day,” he 
uses again the whole name and title of Christ. 
Hence the ‘“‘who” might be referred back to 
“God” (ver. 9), whose gracious doings are 
spoken of in vy. 5 and 6, and to whom the con- 
firmation in the faith is ascribed (2 Cor. i. 21; 
Rom. xvi. 25). The effect then of the Divine 
confirmation of the testimony of Christ in them 
would be regarded as awakening the hope also 
that God would establish them still further.+ 
The reference however to Christ must still be 
maintained. The use of the full phrase “in the 
day of our Lord Jesus Christ,’’ must be regarded 
only as the adoption of a solemn formula, else- 
where also employed, to designate the time of the 
second advent (comp. 2 Tim. i. 18). In 2 Thess. 


“iil. 8 we have likewise the work of confirming 


believers ascribed to Christ. And this is men- 
tioned here in correspondence with what is said 
of their not coming behind in any gift and of 
their patient waiting. It involves also what 
follows.—Unto the end.—. e., as the con- 
nection requires, not the end of the present life 
of individuals, but the end of the present dis- 
pensation, which terminates at the second ad- 
vent, when the new era (αἰὼν μέλλων) will come in. 
—‘' Blameless.’’—A short constructio pregnans 
--οἰς τὸ εἶναι ὑμᾶς: that ye may be, [which is 
supplied inthe E.V. <‘‘Compare the expressions 
διδάσκειν σοφὸν, αὐξάνειν μέγαν, to teach a man 
so as to become wise, to increase him so as to be 


[* Neander believed that in the minds of the Apostles, es- 
pecially in Paul, a progressive development in Eschatology 
took place. The second advent at first seemed close at hand 
and possible in their day, but as they became more enlight- 
ened as to the future by the illuminations of the Spirit, it 
stood at a farther remove. Neander “Plant and ‘Train, of 
the Christian Church,” p. 484.] 


+ [The reasons for referring “ Who” to God, ver. 4, are 
well given by Stanley “1. καὶ βεβαιώσει: also confirm, 
evidently refers back to ἐβεβαιώθη: was confirmed, in 
ver.6.” 2. “In the day of the Lord Jesus Christ,” would 
else be: “in His day.” 3.0 θεός ; Godis the general subject 
of the whole sentence, and therefore repeated in ver. 9. 
“God is faithful. For the sense comp. Phil i. 6.” To these 
may be added a 4. from Hodge : “ vocation and perseverance 
are in the work of redemption specially referred to the 
Father.” The same position is taken by Calvin, Alford, Bill- 
roth, Olshausen, de Wette, Osiander and others.} 


great; Kiihner, 3417, 8. This is called by gram: 
marians a proleptic use of the adjective.”” Words. 
See Winer, Gram. Part 111. 3 lxvi. 8. g.]. By the 
term ‘blameless’ we understand such as are liable 
to no accusation; and this not simply putatively, 
but, since he is speaking of their condition at 
the appearing of Christ, in the sense of an actual 
or perfected holiness, so that the All-seeing 
Judge Himself will have nothing to lay to their 
charge (comp. Eph. v. 27). Meyer. ‘This 
blamelessness is conditioned upon perseverance 
in the faith by which our justification is appro- 
priated, and therefore is imputed; nevertheless 
by virtue of the moral nature and power of faith, 
as well as by virtue of the sanctification through 
the Holy Ghost, it is entirely of a moral nature 
(Rom. vi. 1 ff.; viii. 1 ff.). Hence the per- 
son who is ἀνέγκλητος: blameless, appears at the 
revelation of Christ not indeed as ἀναμάρτητος: 
sinless, but as a ‘‘new creature in Christ” (2 Cor. 
γ. 17) who having been Divinely restored (Eph. 
ii. 10) and progressively sanctified (1 Thess. v. 
23) has worked out his own salvation in the 
moral power of a new life (Phil. 11, 12). [But 
here a question arises. Is this promise absolute 
or conditional? Conybeare and Howson add 
the gloss, ‘‘He will do His part to confirm you.” 
Hammond puts in the qualification, ‘“‘God will 
make good His promise if you do not fail your- 
selves.” A. Clark inquires ‘‘But can it be said 
that God will keep what is either not intrusted 
to Him? or, after being intrusted, is taken 
away?” But such limitations seem to take from 
the promise its blessedness and comfort, for if 
this promise be of any value, it is the fact that it 
furnishes a guarantee against that greatest of dan- 
gers, the ficklenzss of the human will. It is in 
view of this danger, so manifest in the Corinthi- 
ans, that Paul expresses his assurance of their 
steadfastness as grounded in the confirming grace 
of God. It were better therefore to take the 
promise absolutely. ‘Those to whom God gives 
the renewing influence of the Spirit, He thereby 
pledges himself to save; for the ‘first fruits of 
the spirit’ are of the nature of a pledge.”’ Hodge. } 

Ver. 9. Refers the hope expressed in ver. 8 to 
its deepest ground.—God is faithful.—He will 
not drop the work He has begun after the fashion 
of weak inconstant men; but persevering in love 
He will carry out that which was commenced in 
love, even unto its goal. (Comp. Phil. i. 6; 1 
Thess. v. 24; 2 Thess. iii. 3; Rom. xi. 29)— 
[‘‘Here, on this fidelity of God, and not on the 
strength of the believers’ purpose to persevere, nor 
on any assumption that the principle of religion 
in their hearts was indestructible, was the con- 
fidence of the Apostle in their steadfastness 
grounded.” Hodge. This faithfulness of God is 
pledged in three directions: 1. to Himself in the 
purpose formed; 2. to Christ in the covenant 
made with Him, Is. liii.; and 3. to believers]. 
—Through whom.—dvd ov: a popular ex- 
pression. We.can speak of God as a media- 
ting as well as a principal cause. (Rom. xi. 36). 
His Providence it is that through a great variety 
of arrangements and codperating circumstances 
mediates the call, viz., the presentation of the 
Gospel to them, and also its effect in their hearts. 
—Ye were called unto the fellowship of 
His Son, &c.—This calling of God is the com- 


6 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





mencement of His work. Its goal is a participa- 
tion as a son in the glory of his Lord (Comp. 
Rom. viii. 21, 23; 2 Thess. ii. 14). The fellow- 
ship with Jesus Christ embraces our entire con- 
dition, into which we are transferred through 
the power of the word when heard and received, 
and through the sacraments, extending from 
childhood on until we come into the inheritance 
of the glory which is to be revealed in Him and 
in us also.”’ Burger. 


But does not ver. 9 compel us to take God as 
the subject in ver. 8? [Certainly; one would sup- 
pose so]. By no means [!j. The truth of God 
is a pledge that Christ will confirm us. For it 
is precisely because we have been called through 
the unchangeable loving will of the Father to 
have part in Him, the glorified Son of God, and 
therefore to be made conformable unto Him that 
He whose will is ever one with the Father 
can do no other than confirm us. [Rather far 
fetched]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. That Jesus Christ is the living sanctuary, 
whence all the manifestations of Divine grace are 
made, and all gifts are imparted, rests upon the 
character of His person. In Him it pleased God 
that all fulness should dwell—yea, that the ful- 
ness of the Godhead should dwell in Him bodily 
(Col. i. 19; ii. 9). From this it follows that 
believers are complete in Him. (Col. ii. 10). 


2. The actual participation in this fulness is 
conditioned on the confirmation of this ‘‘testi- 
mony of Christ” in the heart through a lively 
faith, which involves a union with Christ and 
results in energetic endeavors, awakened in 
prospect of Christ’s glorious advent, to be be- 
hind in no gift, in order that the Church of 
Christ may become a well-equipped organic 
whole, and so ripen on to perfection. 


3. To this actual confirmation of the truth in 
the heart there corresponds the work of Christ, 
resting upon the faithfulness of God who has 
called us unto the fellowship of His Son, for the 
confirmation of His own unto the end that they 
may be found blameless at His appearing, and 
prepared to participate in His glory as a bride 
adorned for the bridegroom (Rey. xxi. 2, 9; 
comp. 2 Cor. xi. 2; Col. i. 12). 

4. The nature of the believers’ calling: 1. As 
to its condition. It is a fellowship with Christ 
through faith in character, in sufferings, and in 
glory. 2. As to its permanence, endurance unto 
the end; kept by the power of a faithful God. 
8. As to its activity, a cultivation of Divine gifts 
in the service of Christ. ] 





—s 


[5. The second advent of Christ is possible for 
any generation, and ought constantly to be 
looked for, desired and prayed for. ] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


1. A proper joy at the prosperity of a church: 
a, expresses itself in thanks to God, (ver. 4); ὃ. 
is occasioned by the grace of God manifested ἐς 
it in Jesus Christ; [c. and should fill every min- 
ister’s heart even as it did Paul’s, compensating 
him for all the toil and suffering of his minis- 
try]. 

2. The wealth of a church in doctrine, [or ut- 
terance] and knowledge, a. has its ground in 
Christ, (ver. 5); ὁ. is obtained through the con- 
firmation of his testimony in it. 

3. The right waiting for the coming of Christ 
allows us to remain neither idle nor unfruitful, 
but inspires us with an earnest zeal constantly 
to appropriate and improve every spiritual gift. 

4. Our hope for the perfection of Christians is 
our confidence in Christ [or God], who will con- 
firm them blameless unto the end, and it ig 
founded upon the faithfulness of God who has 
called us to the fellowship of His Son. (ver. 9.) 

[5. The test of a true or false Christian is his 
waiting for or dreading the revelation of Christ. 
Bengel]. 

Heusner: Ver. 4: 1. Gratitude is something 
more than prayer. He who does nothing but al- 
ways pray, is and appears ever unsatisfied. 2, 
God must become our God, 7. e., we should not 
only acknowledge Him as God in general, but we 
should also recognize Him as our own God from 
all the experiences of life. Thisis true egotism, 
8, A teacher has no blessing except what comes 
from God. Ver. 5: 1. Wealth in that which is 
needful for salvation is true permanent wealth, 
2. The amount the Apostles accomplished in 
their churches ought to shame us. They were 
obliged to quarry their churches out of the 
rough rock. We find Christians ready made to 
our hand, yet how little we achieve. Ver. 7: 
Christian life in a church is to be known by the 
awakening of all good Christian energies. Every 
one should be ready to serve the holy cause of 
Christ with his gift. Wer. 8: Unblamableness 


at Christ’s judgment should be the goal of a 


Christian. 

[Ver. 4. There is a bright side even to the 
most disheartening circumstances of the church. 
It is our duty to consider these first and take 
courage]. ὶ 

[Vers. 4-9, The rebukes of a minister, when 
steeped in love and prefaced by commendation 
descend like an excellent oil that doth not 
break the head]. 





CHAP. I. 10-17. 27 





10 


11 


SECOND DIVISION. 


REPROOF OF DEFECTS AND FAULTS. 
I. Exhortation to unity and rebuke of party spirit. 
CuapTER I. 10-17. 


Now [But‘] I beseech [exhort?] you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus: 
Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and chat there be no divisions among you; 
but [rather*] that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind [γνώμῃ sentiment] 
and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, 
by them which [who] are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among, 
you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos;. 


I thank God that I baptized! 


12 

13 and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified fort you?’ 
14 or were ye baptized in [into: εἰς] the name of Paul? 

15 none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any [In order that no one*] should say 


17 


that [ had baptized in [ye were baptized into®] mine own name. And [I baptized! 
also the household of Stephanas; besides I know not whether I baptized any other.. 
For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: 


1 Ver. 10.—[“dé: but, introduces a contrast to the thankful assurance just expressed.”—Alf.] 

2 Ver. 10.---ἰφἰπαρακαλῶ ; “obsecro—a mixture of entreaty and command.”’—Stanley. | 

3 Ver. 10.---ἰ δὲ: but rather.—Hartung, Parlikellcher, i. 171.] 

£Ver.13.—[“ Instead ot ὑπὲρ some MSS. B. D.* have περὶ, but ὑπὲρ isin A. C. D.***E. Ἐς G. I. andsalso in Cod. Sin?” 


-—Words.] 


5 Ver. 15.—[tva μή τις εἴπῃ; ἵνα carries here a telic force.] 
6 Ver. 15.—Instead of ἐβάπτισα, which is to be accounted for from its occurring in the next verse, Lachmann and: 


Tischendorf [and Alford and Wordsworth] in accordance with the best authorities read ἐβαπτίσθητε. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


The connection may be understood thus: I 
thank my God for his work of grace among you, 
and in view of his faithfulness am confident that 
the work, Christ [or God’s] has begun, he will 
perfect. You, nevertheless, I exhort, that ye 
consider carefully what is required for the fulfil- 
ment of this work, and remove whatsoever shall 
hinder it. 

Ver. 1. The Exhortation—I exhort you 
brethren.—A friendly, winning address, which, 
as an evidence of his fellowship in the faith and 
his equality with them in it, imparts to his exhor- 
tation the character of an entreaty. This is also 
implied in the Greek παρακαλῶ. ‘Paul often 
adds the term: brother, when he has an earnest 
word to utter.” (vii. 29; x.1; xiv. 20). Meyer. 
The de: but, introduces the transition from his 
exhibition of the bright side of the church to the 
reproof of its dark side. It is asif he said: 
“For much in you I have to thank God, but 
there is much in you which I have to censure.” 
Neanver.—By the name of our Lord Jesus 
Christ.—It is thus he strengthens his exhorta- 
tion and presents a motive for compliance.— 
[‘‘The name of Christ was the bond of union 
and the most holy thing by which they could be 
adjured.”’ Stantey.]. The force of it lay in this, 
that they all acknowledged Jesus Christ to be 
their Lord, and so professed themselves to belong 
to one and the same Master; and in this the 
obligation to unity was unmistakably indicated. 
Similar instances are found in Rom. xv. 30; xii. 
1; 2 Cor. x. 1.—The contents and aim of the 





exhortation are expressed in the several clauses: 
which set forth the same leading thoughts in: 
several relations [and they are introduced by iva: 
in order that, which points not only to the import: 
but also to the intent of the exhortation. See 
WineER, ti. 6.]—That ye all speak the 
same thing.—By this he means: give expression 
to their inward accord and harmony of sentiment. 
It is precisely the opposite of the conduct men- 
tioned in νυ. 12. They were with one voice to: 
avow their allegiance to the one Lord, to the ex-. 
clusion of all divisive party-watchwords. This. 
is obvious from the following negative clause— 
that there be no divisions among you.— 
Inasmuch as he is not treating here of ‘“dissen- 
tions in doctrine, but of divisions arising from 
adherence to different leaders, and from peculiar. 
modes of apprehending and applying doctrine,” 
we are not to regard him as insisting upon ‘an. 
exact uniformity of profession in the essential 
points of doctrine and life.” [The word used. 
for divisions is σχίσματα, lit.: schisms. These, 
“in their ecclesiastical sense, are unauthorized: 
separations from the church. But those which. 
existed at Corinth were not of the nature of 
hostile sects refusing communion witb each other, 
but such as may exist in the bosom of the same 
church, consisting in alienation of feeling and 
party strifes.”’ Hopcr.]—But rather that ye 
be perfectly joined together in the same 
mind and in the same judgment.—tThe in- 
ward positive side implied in the previous nega- 
tive one. [The original word for ‘joined to- 
gether” is from καταρτίζειν : to repair, to mend, 
to reunite and make perfect what has been broken. 
It were natural therefore to suppose an allusion 


38 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





here to the broken condition of the church which 
needed to be reunited and to translate the word 
as in the text literally. So Alf. and Hodge and 
Stanley, who says that ““καταρτιστήρ was the 
acknowledged phrase in classical Greek for a 
reconciler of factions.’ Calvin takes the word 
to signify: ‘‘fitly joined together, just as the 
members of the human body are joined in most 
admirable symmetry,”’ thus furnishing a picture 
of what the church should be. Kling however, 
following the Vulgate and Theoph. prefers the 
derivative sense of: perfect, and makes it— 
τέλειοι. That wherein they were to be united 
is given in two words νοῦς and γνώμη. The for- 
mer ‘embraces that peculiar mode of thought 
and of viewing life which lays the foundations 
for the moral judgment and moral self-determi- 
nation. Soin1 Tim. vi. 5; 2 Tim. iii. 8. Comp. 
Brox, Bibl. Seelenlehre, 3 51; Detirzscu, Bibl. 
Psychol. ἢ 189. The latter is power of knowledge, 
understanding, spirit, also sense, disposition, as 
well as insight obtained, view, opinion, conviction, 
also resolve, design, aim; view expressed—counsel, 
proposition. The two must here be distin- 
guished. Only it cannot be readily decided 
which denotes the side of thought and judg- 
ment, and which that of will and disposition. 
Since, however, γνώμη is used elsewhere in this 
Epistle to signify wew, and counsel (see vii. 25, 
40, also 2 Cor. viii. 10), perhaps it would be best 
to take it here also in a theoretic acceptation— 
view, conviction. [‘‘In the New Testament it 
always means judgment and opinion. When the 
two words are used together, the former is most 
naturally understood of feeling, a sense in which 
the word mind is often used by us.” Honpae. 
‘Disposition and opinion.” AtLrorp]. 

Ver. 11. Explains the occasion and motives for 
the exhortation, while the disgrace of it is softened 
by the fraternal address.—For it hath been 
declared unto me of you, my brethren, by 
them of Chloe.—Sad reports had reached him, 
and he names his authorities inadvance. What 
relation these persons sustained to Chloe, whether 
children, or servants, or other members of her 
-household, cannot be ascertained from the text, 
‘‘Paul names his informants without reserve in 
order to obviate suspicion.” Brssrr. ‘‘Conceal- 
ment and mystery sow distrust and destroy 
love.” Burarer. This Chloe must at all events 
have been a woman well known to the Corinthian 
brethren, either as a resident at Corinth, so 
that her people had come from thence to Corinth, 
or as a resident at Ephesus, so that these persons 
had learned of the state of things at Corinth 
during a visit there.—-that there are con- 
tentions among σου. -- ἔριδες: discords, 
wranglings, which would inevitably lead to sepa- 
rations, to a rent in the Church, if not arrested 
in season. [Here he sets forth in severer phrase 
what he had more gently intimated in the word 
‘schisms’? above, and shows its evil and bitter 
character. ] 

Ver. 12. Fuller explanation. Now this I 
-‘mean.—roivro: this, as commonly, points to 
-what follows, (vii. 29; xv. 50), not to what pre- 
cedes. That every one of you saith: ({.6.} has 
one or other of the following speeches in his 








brachilogy here. In these four statements Paul 
intended to comprehend all the declarations 
current in the chapter regarding religious parti- 
sanship. Each adherent of the respective sections 
used one of the following expressions”’]. ‘‘Saitk 
boastfully.” Benaren. He here vividly sets before 
us the several partisans, as they step out side by 
side, or in opposing ranks, each announcing the 
name of the leader he followed. It is asif he 
saw or heard them thus arraying themselves 
“As they were wont to do at the school, so here 
they acted in the Church.” Brssrr.—I am of 
Paul,—(i.¢.) I belong to him as my head or 
spiritual father. The Genitive of ownership or 
dependence. The order of mention is most readily 
explained by supposing it to correspond with 
that of the rise of the parties. According to 
Neanper, Paul follows the order of particular 
relationship, since the Apollos-party was only a 
fraction ofthe Pauline. The idea of a climax (Ben- 
GEL), Paul in his humiliation putting himself at 
the bottom, is superfluous and improbable. Al- 
together groundless, however, and without any 
indication in its favor, yea, directly contrary to 
ver. 14, is the opinion of the old expositors, that 
Paul used these names at random by way of a 
cover to the real leaders whom he had in mind. 
See the statement made respecting these parties 
and their rise in 32 of the Introduction. The 
Pauline party naturally stands first, since the 
Church depended on Paul as its founder, and 
that portion which clave to Paul and his ways, 
(after a fraction had defected to Apollos), must 
beregarded asthe original party.—I of Apollos, 
—(ashortened form for Apollonius). He was just 
as little disposed to act the part of leader, as was 
Paul. This may be seen from the fact that not- 
withstanding the urgent solicitation of Paul, he 
positively declined to visit Corinth at that time. 
This was no doubt with a view to avoid giving 
any fresh fuel to the strife which had already 
sprung up. (Comp. iv. 6; xvi. 12). Respecting 
him see Acts xviii. 24 etc.; xix. 1; also OSIANDER 
on our passage [and Smirn, Bible Dict.]. That he 
was a humble man, one who did not pride him- 
self upon his culture, one of the few ‘wise after 
the flesh,” who had been early called (i. 26) and 
‘had sanctified their science by faith in Christ, 
to whom they made it subservient,” is clear from 
his willingness to be instructed by those simple 
mechanics, Aquila and Priscilla. Far from 
wishing to outbid Paul for influence and popu- 
larity, he labored only to confirm believers by a 
cautious reference to the Prophecies of the Old 
Testament. We find him once more mentioned 
commendatorily in Titus iii. 18. Highly proba- 
ble is the suggestion, first made by Luther, an 

afterwards ably advocated by Bleek, that he was 
the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Osi- 
ander calls this Epistle a most noble monument, 
both of his genius, which harmoniously combined 
human culture and Divine illumination, and of 
his style of doctrine, which was directed mainly 
to the work of atonement, and to the illustration 
of the fulfilment of the Old Covenant in the New, 
&e.—I of Cephas,—(i ¢.) Peter, without doubt, 
It was his Aramean name, found also at ix. 5; 
xv. 6; Gal. ii. 9. Whether the party following 


mouth, A like use of ἕκαστος; every one, ap-| him adopted this name, because they derived it 
pears in xiv. 26, [Wuver says, “There is no | through Jewish emissaries out of Syria, or be- 


== ~~), 


CHAP. 


I. 10-17. 29 





cause it seemed to them more sacred as coming | to refine it by philosophical criticism.’’ ΝΈΑΝ ΕΚ) 


from the mouth of our Lord (Jno. i. 42), or be- 
cause the Shibboleth of a vernacular word 
sounded more imposingly, we are not able to 
decide. It is more probable that the Jewish 
name was the more common one with Paul. 
Only once in Gal. ii. 7 ff, do we find him using 
the Greek name: Peter.—I of Christ.—As a 
supplement to what was said in the Introduction 
on this point, see Meyer in loco. We here give 
the main particulars. First, according to a fair 
exegesis it must be maintained that the parties 
were four in number. Alike needless and inad- 
missible is the attempt to resolve them, either 
into two essentially identical pairs (as Baur 
does, who distinguishes between that ‘‘of Paul” 
and that ‘‘of Apollos” only in form, and takes 
that ‘‘of Christ” to be the same as that ‘of Pe- 
ter,’ which only assumed this cognomen because 
it deemed a genuine Apostleship dependent on 
personal connection with Christ, or which, as 
Beeker thinks, consisted of native Jewish con- 
verts connected with the Petrinists that had 
come in from abroad, but had called themselves 
Christians because they had been converted by 
Paul and Apollos); or into two main parties: 
that of the Apostles and that of Christ, the three 
first adhering to Apostles or Apostolic teachers, 
and the fourth going back immediately to Christ 
(as Neander and others do); or into three par- 
ties, in such a way as either to set that ‘of 
Christ’? as the only rightly disposed one, in 
contrast with the others as sectarian, see iii. 23, 
(as Schott and the Greek expositors) ; or to assign 
the designation ‘‘of Christ’”’ to the three parties 
in common who all professed themselves Christ’s, 
but who desired to have their participation in 
him regarded as dependent on their connection 
with this or that teacher (as Rabiger: “I belong 
indeed to Christ, but itis as a Pauliner and am 
nevertheless a true Christian’). But Calovius 
hit the truth long ago, when he said ‘‘even those 
who called themselves Christians from Christ 
were guilty of schism, since they separated 
themselves from the rest in a schismatic spirit 
and insisted on appropriating this term to them- 
selves alone.” To this we may add what Flacius 
writes, ‘¢ Under the pretext of Christ’s name they 
scorned all teachers and would have nothing to 
do with them, pretending that they were wise 
enough for themselves without the aid of other 
instructors. For there was sin on both sides, 
either by exalting Church teachers too much or 
by appreciating them too 11{{16.᾽ As soon as the 
knowledge of Christ came to be established in 
the Church, there may have been persons, who, 
in opposition to an over-estimate of all human 
instrumentalities, held to an independent Chris- 
tianity, and so were easily brought to look away 
from these instrumentalities altogether, and with 
utter contempt of their worth and authority, 
fell into the way of asserting their exclusive de- 
pendence upon Christ, and so, priding themselves 
on this point, got to regard themselves as his 
sole genuine disciples, and tried to pass for such. 
To seek for this class exclusively among Jewish 
or among Gentile converts (‘‘ the philosophically 
educated to whom Christ appeared like a second 








is altogether unwarranted. The few philosophi- 
cally educated Gentile converts could easily have 
satisfied themselves with the tendencies of the 
Apollos party. Nor are we justified in tracing to 
these the beginning of Gnosticism or Ebionitism, 
or in charging upon them a looseness in morals 
and a denial of the doctrine of the resurrection. 
According to Roman Catholic expositors, the 
party ‘‘of Apollos’? were in danger of falling 
into a false spiritualism which volatilized the 
positive contents of Christianity; the party ‘of 
Peter” contained the germs of the later sect of 
Ebionites; and the type of the party of Christ 
was an ecclesiastical liberalism. 

Ver. 13. The reproof, in the form of questions 
which expose the absurdity of the partisanship 
just charged.—Is Christ divided ?—There is 
a doubt whether this should be read asa question 
or as a simple declaration. Meyer and others 
[likewise Stahley following Lachmann] take it as 
an emphatic assertion of the lamentable results 
of the aforenamed divisions: ‘‘Christ has been 
divided! torn up into various sect-Christs in- 
stead of being entirely and undividedly the 
Christ common to all!” Since each of the exclu- 
sive parties claimed to have him, their conduct 
was virtually a rending of Christ. But ever 
since Chrysostom, commentators have generally 
regarded the words as a question. This would 
be more conformable to the analogy of the other 
clauses, and be just as forcible. Besides the 
subsequent question is of different import, so 
that it. is not to be expected he would connect the 
second to the first with an or, as in the case of 
the third which is but a correlate to the second. 
This is what Bence means. ‘The cross and 
baptism claim us for Christ. The correlatives 
are, redemption and self-consecration.”—To the 
sound consciousness of a true Christian who 
knows but one Christ, the bond of universal fel- 
lowship, such partisanship is a contradiction. It 
involves a division of Christ against himself, 
since the parties, who exclude each other, all 
think to have him. Hence the question, ‘Is 
Christ divided? Is there a Pauline, an Apollo- 
nian, a Petrine, a Christian Christ?” Thus we 
apply the question to all parties alike; and not 
merely to the fourth, as Baur does, who takes 
Paul to imply, that the name of Christ employed 
asa party designation was the most significant 
evidence, that they, by their sectarianism, had 
rent Christ in pieces. Every party, he says, must 
still, as a Christian party, have thought to have 
Christ. If then there were but one proper 
Christ-party, it followed that the one Christ, in 
whom all distinctions ought to vanish, was rent 
asunder (Tiib. Zeitschrift, 1836, s. 4). It is 
clear in this case that the clause is not to be taken 
as a question. Under the term Christ, we are to 
undertsand not the Church as a mystical body of 
Christ (Estius, Olsh. ), still less Christian doctrine, 
the Gospel (Grotius), but the Person of Christ, 
as the Head of the Church, in opposition to all 
party leaders. This is evident from the follow- 
ing questions, in which the exclusive right of 
Christ as Lord over His redeemed ones, and their 
obligations to Him as having been baptized into 


perhaps higher Socrates, and who, despising the | His name, are set forth: Was Paul crucified 
Apostolic form of the doctrine of Christ, sought | for you?—Lit: Paul surely was not crucified 


80 





for you; was He? [The question is introduced 
here with the negative Particle μή. Meyer 
adduces this as an argument to prove that the pre- 
vious clause which is without μή, is consequently 
to be read differently, as a declaration. ‘To this 
Alford replies, ‘‘that the μή introduces a new 
form of interrogation respecting a new person, 
viz. Paul; and that it was natural for solemnity’s 
sake to express the other question differently. 
In μεμέρισται ὁ χριστός the majesty of Christ’s 
person is set against the unworthy insinuation con- 
veyed in: ‘‘is divided””—in μή Παῦλος ἐσταυρώϑη 
ὑπερ ὑμῶν, the meanness of the individual Paul 
is set against the triumph of Divine love implied 
in ‘‘was crucified for you.” ] With the strictest 
impartiality, which here appears as the truest 
prudence, he rebukes first the partisan attach- 
ment to his own person, and makes those, who 
set him up as their leader, to feel his painful dis- 
approval of their course. Such persous while 
boasting of their connection with him, were as- 
assigning to him a position which belonged to 
Christ alone. They were acting on the supposi- 
tion that he had suffered for them, an act which 
was the ground of their belonging to Christ, who 
through His sacrifice for sinners had acquired 
the right to their undivided devotion (comp. 2 
Cor. v. 15). [If (as Socinianism alleges) the suf- 
ferings of Christ were merely exemplary, there 
would be no such absurdity or simplicity, as St. 
Paul here assumes to exist, in comparing the 
sufferings of Christ to the sufferings of Paul”’ 
Worps]. To this ground of claim there corres- 
ponds the question expressing and confirming 
their personal objection —Or were ye bap- 
tized unto the name of Paul?—That is: 
was the name of Paul called over you at your 
baptism, as though he were the person to whom 
you pledged yourselves, and in whom ye believed 
and whom you professed as your Lord and 
Saviour? This is certainly the sense, although 
“the baptism into the name” may be regarded 
primarily as submersion into it as a person’s life- 
element; so also as an introduction into fellow- 
ship with the party named as into an essential 
ground of salvation; or as immersion in reference 
to him, so that the obligation to profess faith in 
that which is expressed by the name is indicated 
(comp. on Matth. xxviii. 19). ‘The fact that 
Paul puts his name for all the rest proves how 
ingenuously he was opposed to all this party spi- 
rit, and how humbly he was anxious that Christ’s 
name should not be prejudiced through his own” 
NEANDER. 

Vers. 14-16. I thank God that I bap- 
tized none of you.—The Apostle recognizes 
as a thank-worthy Providence that he had been 
kept, for the most part, from administering bap- 
tism, since he had thereby obviated all appear- 
ance of intention to bind the baptized to his own 
person, an appearance which certainly would 
have arisen had he here acted contrary to his 
usual custom elsewhere ;—but Crispus, the ruler 
of the synagogue, converted through Paul (Acts 
xviii. 8),—and Gaius, certainly not the one of 
Derby (Acts xx. 4), but the same as that Gaius 
mentioned in Rom. xy. 23, a man of distinction, 
who entertained Paul, and with him the Church, 
either by furnishing his house as a place for 
meeting, or by receiving there such of the Church 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





as wished to visit Paul—in order that no one 
should say—By this is expressed not the design 
of the Apostle, but the Divine intention in order- 
ing his conduct in such a way.—While writing 
he recalls another exception, ‘‘ perhaps from in- 
formation derived from Stephanas himself, who 
was with him.”—And I baptized also the 
household of Stephanas—the family whom 
in xvi. 15 he calls ‘‘the first fruits of Achaia.” 
οἶκος includes also the domestics. [‘‘ Under the 
old dispensation, whenever any one professed 
Judaism, or entered into covenant with God, ag 
one of his people, all his children and dependents, 
that is, all to whom he stood in a representative 
relation, were included in the covenant, and re- 
ceived its sign. In like manner, under the Gos- — 
pel, when a Jew or Gentile joined the Church, 
his children received baptism and were recog- 
nized as members of the Christian Church” 
Hopes]. In order to avoid all blame for want of 
frankness he adds, besides I know not 
whether I baptized any other.—[‘ Inspira- 
tion, although it rendered him infallible, did not 
make him omniscient’’]. It will be seen that he 
baptized only the first converts, afterwards, when 
these multiplied, he transferred the business te 
helpers, possibly also to deacons, to whose func- 
tions this in course belonged. In like manner 
Peter (Acts x. 48). On this point he next pro- 
ceeds to explain himself more fully by stating the 
veiw he took of his office. 


Ver. 17.4 For Christ sent me not to 
baptize but to preach the Gospel.—Sent: 
ἀπέστειλεν ἃ plain allusion here to his of- 
fice as ἀπόστολος. The appointment to this of- 
fice did indeed include the work of baptizing 
(Matth. xxviii. 19). But in Mark xvi. 15, as 
well as in Luke xxiv. 47; Acts i. 8, and John xy. 
27, the work of preaching, of bearing testimony 
concerning Christ, appears to be the chief calling 
of an Apostle. And so it was in the calling of 
Paul (Acts ix. 15; xxii. 15; xxvi. 16-18 comp. 
Gal. i. 16). The preaching which awakened 
faith, was the proper entrance upon the work of 
Christ, who indeed never Himself baptized but 
only through His disciples (John iv. 2). [**The 
main thing in the commission was to make dis- 
ciples. To recognize them as such by baptism, 
was subordinate, though commanded, and not to 
be safely neglected. In the Apostolic form of 
religion, truth stood immeasurably above exter- 
nal rites. The Apostasy of the Church consisted 
in making rites more important than the truth” 
Hopar].—Whether we are to assume here, as Cal- 
vin does, an ironical hit intended at the opposers, 
who employed the easier function to gain adhe- 
rents, may be doubted. The supposition that 
they did so, is, at least, uncertain. The word 
εὐαγγελίζεσϑαι: to evangelize, in classic usage, 
and commonly in the Old Testament, like "\gs*5) 


employed to denote the announcement of all sorts 
of good news, is in the New Testament used 
solely in regard to‘‘the good tidings,” by way of 
preéminence, the proclamation of salvation in 
Christ, and the fulfilment of the promises and 
the perfect revelation of divine grace before pre- 
pared (Is. xl. 9; 111. 7; Ix. 6; Ixi. 1, &c.—The 
contrast in ‘ not,’’—‘‘ but,” is not to be weakened 
into a comparative, ‘“‘not so much as.’’ Baptism 


CHAP. I. 10.:17α. 


81 





was not the object of his commission, although 
it was allowed to him. (Acts ix. 15, 20; xxii. 15; 
xxvi. 16-18.) 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The Church is essentially one, as a body 
subject to Jesus Christ, the one perfect Lord 
and Head, who has an absolute right over all its 
members by virtue of His complete self-offering 
in their behalf, and to whom they are absolutely 
bound by being taken up into fellowship with 
Him, as the element of their life and the sole 
ground of their salvation. It can properly be 
divided no more than Christ Himself can be 
divided. [This unity consists of onenesss of 
sentiment, of conviction and of speech. That is, 
there must be an inward and an outward unity, 
an invisible and a visible unity; the former 
manifesting itself in the later, the latter sus- 
tained by the former. The pretence of the one 
is not sufficient without the other.—See this 
whole matter exhaustively discussed by BAxTEr 
on “Catholic Unity,” ‘Reasons for Christian 
Unity and Concord,” ‘The Catholic Church De- 
scribed,’ Practical Works, vol. iv.; Lirron ““ On 
the Church of Christ,” B. ii. part ii. chap. 1; 
Joun M. Mason, Complete Works, vol. ii. p. 265; 
Emmon’s Works, vol. ii. sec. 13]. 

2. All sectarianism arising out of an inordi- 
nate preference for favorite teachers is a sin. It 
ruptures this unity by limiting Christ’s right over 
us and our subjection to Him. It concedes toa 
mere man, to his peculiar opinions and ways and 
doctrines, something of that power and impor- 
tance which belong to Christ alone; inasmuch as 
it binds men, and would fain bind all, to these 
objects, as if on these our whole salvation de- 
pended; causes them to move in these as the 
very element of their existence; draws to these 
their entire devotion, and so makes a human 
personality with all its individuality and singu- 
larity an essential mediator of spiritual life, 
which comes alone by truth and grace. 

3. The proper view of Christ and of the instru- 
mentalities He employs in their relation to Him 
is the true antidote against schismatical ten- 
dencies. Obrist is the fountain-head of truth 
and grace, in whom all fulness dwells, and from 
whom all believers, whether teachers or taught, 
derive their spiritual excellencies. Where this 
truth is recognized, there there can be no inordin- 
ate devotion tohuman agencies. These agencies 
can be regarded only as the various imperfect 
rays of the One Light, which, so far from de- 
taining us by themselves, should conduct us up to 
the source from whence they stream. Yet just 
as little does it become us to despise these hu- 
man agencies, and withdraw into our own par- 
ticular knowledge and experience of Christ, as 
though we were sufficient unto ourselves. Ra- 
ther it must appear to us that, the more super- 
abundant and glorious the fulness of Christ is, 
the greater must be the necessity for numerous 
and manifold vessels to take it up, from various 
sides and according to their several capacities, 
and to present it to others in ways suited to their 
manifold necessities, so that persons shall be 
most easily led, one through one and another 
through another, into a participation of the 











{ 


riches of Christ, according to their several apti- 
tudes and needs. 

But the more this is done in truth the more 
open does a person gradually become to other 
aspects of Christ and to other organs of His. 
And this will lead us, on the one hand, to a just 
estimate of these organs themselves, and, on the 
other hand, to modesty of deportment and toa 
loving regard for such as were first led to Christ 
and edified by this or that teacher. And while 
the interested adherence to one particular as- 
pect of Christ leads to a division of the one 
Christ in our feelings, and then to a rupture of 
the Church into parties, which deny to each 
other the full and proper enjoyment of salvation, 
and shut themselves up against each other in 
those aspects of the life and character of Christ 
which have been exhibited to them through the 
several organs they have chosen, the procedure 
we have been advocating conducts at last to a 
perfect unity of conviction and sentiment, which, 
precluding all division, makes itself known in 
unity of speech, wherein the manifold voices 
confessing the one all-embracing, all-sufficing 
Christ, blend in harmony. This is ἃ catholicity 
which is to be found as little in Romish Christi- 
anity as in the coagulations of a Lutheran or 
Calvanistic specialty. 

4. [Sectarianism; its nature and origin; a 
historical survey of it in its existing aspects]. 
“The tendency to sectarianism lies in human 
selfishness and stubbornness of opinion, in con- 
ceit and egoism. Sectarianism does not con- 
sist in holding fast to our profession for con- 
science sake, but in using our own form of doc- 
trine or religion as a means for exalting ourselves 
and for ruling over or opposing others. And 
this is not confined to leaders alone. That sec- 
tary who does not feel strong or courageous 
enough to take the lead, will at least join him- 
self with ambitious devotion to some other per- 
son better able to do it, in whose honor and 
glory he may share. But Christianity refuses to 
be sectarian at all. How then, it may be asked, 
do existing divisions comport with it? They 
arise, under the Providence of God, out of the 
diversity of human opinions. Only, these de- 
nominations ought not to hate one another, but 
they ought to plant themselves on the one com- 
mon ground, Christ, and recognize each other 
there.—The one Christ can have but one doc- 
trine and one church. But under the hands of 
men Christianity disintegrates into parties. 
From this arises a necessity for our choosing 
that party which seems to us the purest and 
most Christian. Parties were unavoidable. God 
suffered them that they might become instru- 
mental in exciting Christians to greater zeal, to 
mutual purification, and to the exercise of kindly 
forbearance towards each other. Toleration is 
a word which should not be spoken among 
Christians; for toleration is a very proud, in- 
tolerant word.” Heubner. 

Our confessions (Greek, Romish, Evangelical, 
with all their divisions) are, on the one hand, 


(historical necessities; they resulted from the 


gradual working out of Christian ideas or prin- 
ciples, such as the Theocratic, the Hierarchical, 
and the Protestant, which is the principie of free- 
dom, subject only to the word of God. On the 


82 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


----------------------------------ρ----ς-----ς--ς--ς---ς-------.---ς-ς-ς--- gy 


other hand, they result from the disturbance oc- 
casioned by sin in the development of Christian 
truth and life. ‘his is true even in respect to 
their national forms: the Greek, the Roman, the 
German, and the mixture of the latter with Ro- 
man and other elements. Hence the petrifac- 
tion of the first principle (theocratic) in the Ori- 
ental Greek Church; of the second (the hierar- 
chical) in the Occidental Romish Church, so that 
the third (the Protestant) came to an indepen- 
dent form in the sphere of German life, differ- 
encing itself only according to national peculi- 
arities. In one place there was a rigid adhe- 
rence to the letter, accompanied with great in- 
tellectual acumen and force of will; and in 
another larger freedom prevailed, associated 
with greater breadth and depth of spirit and 
sentiment. But on the part of both (the Re- 
formed and the Lutheran) communions, the in- 
fluence of the two first principles was again felt, 
and the result was a stiffening of life and form, 
which showed itself in the former case in an 
ever-increasingly superficial adherence to the 
letter of the Bible, and in the latter case in an 
externalinduration of a form of doctrine,—which 
was originally free, and which asserted the free- 
dom of the religious personality (justification by 
faith),—until at last in both spheres a false free- 
dom usurped the throne, a subjectivity emanci- 
pated from all obligations to the word of God; in 
other words, rationalism. And now the only 
proper return to unity can be effected by at- 
taining unto the knowledge of the truth of the 
several principles above mentioned, and by fus- 
ing down in our living consciousness the stiff 
forms of the past, and with these the truth of all 
that has been transmitted to us, through a deeper 
penetration into the word, or rather into Christ 
Himself, who is the kernel and substance of the 
written Word; and through a more humble, 
self-denying appropriation of Him in our lives. 
Such a return is at the same time an advance 
towards the true union, which the spirit of God 
will create by the harmonious combination of 
diversities. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


1. The Apostolic exhortation to unity, addressed 
to a church torn by factions, and suited to Chris- 
tendom at the present time. 1. Its matter: a. 
To speak the same thing, unity of confession; ὁ. 
on the ground of unity of sentiment and views. 


2. The motive of such unity: the name of our | 
Lord Jesus Christ; a due regard for the interest | 


all have in Him according as He has given Him- 
self to be known, experienced and enjoyed by 
them (vv. 10-13), 

2. The wrong of parties in Christendom; a, so 
far as they subordinate Christ to human leaders 
or put these literally into His place; ὁ. so far as 
they are servilely dependent on such leaders and 
take pride in them; c. so far as they exclude, 
scorn and hate each other; d. so far as they 
boast of their partisanship in vain self-sufficiency, 
and seek to glorify themselves and their leaders 
in it (vy. 12,13). 

8. The proper conduct of a teacher towards 
such as are devoted to him: a. that he perpetu- 


Eph. iv. 2). 





10), while he never forgets that he and they alike 
are indebted to Christ for everything (ν. 13); 6. 
that he ever keeps in view the main object of hia 
calling, to preach Christ (vy. 17). 

Vers. 13, 14. As the Corinthians made ita 
matter of great moment by whom they were bap- 
tized, instead of considering into whom they had 
been baptized, so now multitudes put a greater 
stress upon the party ly whom they are confirmed, 
that into what atid to what they are confirmed. 
(Bibl. Worterd., 11. 3 79.) 

Starke: Ver.-10. The noblest virtue which 
can befit Christiansis brotherly union through the 
bond of love (Col. iii. 14), and this because of 
Christ’s command (Jno. xiii. 84) and of his prayer 
(Jno. xvii. 11), after the example of the Apostolie 
Church (Acts iy. 82) and the manifold exhorta- 
tions of the Apostles (Phil. ii. 1; 1 Pet. iii. 8; 
Lange:—The unity of the church 
is certainly much insisted on and yery important. 
Yet we must take care not to prescribe one for 
another a form or a name according to our own 
opinions, especially in incidentals which do not 
belong to the fundamentals of faith. In these 
respects there must be variety of judgment. It 
is enough if we agree in all matters essential to 
salvation. Herp. (vy. 11):—Whatashame! Rend- 
ing asunder the body of Christ! _Who perpe- 
trates the mischief? Not the peacemakers, not the 
confessors and friends of Christ, but the zealots 
without knowledge; those who love profane and 
vain babblings; impure spirits who preach 
Christ of contention. O man, study the precept 
which inculeates the restoration of the erring in 
a spirit of meekness (Gal. vi. 1) and exercise 
thyself therein. 
believe every report, but should ascertain facts 
before they reprove. To give information at 
proper quarters from a desire to effect reform is 
no sin; only let care be taken not to exaggerate. 
Ver. 12.—Honor is due to ministers, but they 
must not be served as lords. To call oneself 
Lutheran by way of distinction from the Papists 
or those belonging to other denominations, with- 
out adhering to Luther as authority, is not im- 
proper; but to do this in a sectarian spirit is 
just as wrong as it was for the Corinthians to say, 
‘Tam of Paul.” Ver. 13.—The death of Christ 
is alone meritorious; no saint can merit any- 
thing for himself, much less have his merits 
imputed to others. Vers. 14, 15.—The care of 
God’s Providence over us can best be recognized 
in the issues of events, which is then to be ac- 
knowledged with reverence and gratitude even 
in the smallest particulars. - 

Ver. 10. Burcer: ‘Speak the same thing ;” 
unnecessary, capricious deviation from the estas 
blished forms of doctrine is a violation of the 
spirit of unity and love. 

[‘‘There are many sore divisions at this day in 
the world among and between the professors of 
the Christian religion, both about the doctrine 
and worship of the Gospel, as also the discipline 
thereof. That these divisions are evil in them- 
selves and the cause of great evils, hinderances 
of the Gospel, and all the effects thereof in the 
world, is acknowledged by all; and it is doubt. 
less a thing to be greatly lamented that the genes 
rality of those who are called Christians are 


ally points them away from himself to Christ (vy. | departed from the great rule of ‘keeping the 


Ver. 11.—Teachers should not © 








CHAP. I. 17-25. 


33 





unity of the spirit in the bond of peace.’ He 
who doth not pray always, who is not ready with 
his utmost endeavor to remedy this evil, to re- 
move this great obstruction of the benefit of the 
Gospel is scarce worthy the name of a Christian.” 
JoHN OWEN. | 

[Ver. 13. Carvin: ‘Paul crucified for you!” 
—This passage militates against the wicked con- 
trivance of Papists by which they attempt to 
bolster up their system of indulgences. For itis 
from the blood of Christ and the martyrs that they 
make up that imaginary treasure of the church 
which they pretend is dealt out by means of 


II. 


indulgences. Here, however, Paul in strong 
terms denies that any one but Christ has been 
crucified for us. The martyrs, it is true, died 
for our benefit, but (as Leo* observes) it was to 
furnish an example of perseverance, not to pro- 
cure for us gifts of righteousness.’’ ] 

Vers. 14-17. [If the doctrine of baptismal 
regeneration be correct, Paul was instrumental 
in saving but few souls. Certainly the commis- 
sion of modern Romish missionary seems to 
read the reverse of St. Paul’s. He is sent te 
baptize, not to preach the Gospel. ] 


THE TRUE METHOD OF PREACHING. 


A. Repugnant to the predelictions of both Greeks and Jews. 


CuAPTER. I. 17-25. 


17 
18 


of none effect. 


Not with [in ἐν] wisdom of words, [discourse"] lest the cross of Christ should be made 
For the preaching [discourse] of the cross is to them that perish, 


19 foolishness; but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God. For it is written, I 
will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of 
the prudent. Where is the wise? where 7s the scribe? where is the disputer of this 
world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this? world [the world]? For after 
that [since]’ in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased 
God by the foolishness of preaching* to save them that believe. For [since both] 
the [om. the] Jews require a sign, [signs ]* and the [om. the] Greeks seek after wisdom: 
But we [on the contrary]’ preach Christ crucified, unto the [om. the] Jews a 
stumblingblock, and unto the [om. the] Greeks [Gentiles ἔϑνεσι]" foolishness; But 
unto them which are called, [these, the called]® both Jews and Greeks, Christ the 
power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser 


20 
21 


22 
23 


24 
25 


than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 


1 Ver. 17.—[év σόφίᾳ λόγου might be rendered: in philosophic discourse. ] 


2 Ver. 20.—The τούτου of the received text is undoubtedly transferred from the preceding. 


dorf reject it according to the best authorities. 
3 Ver, 21.—[émevdy is not temporal but illative—Alf.] 


Lachmann and Tischen- 


4 Ver. 21.--- [κηρύγματος : passive noun, the thing preached both in contents and in form.] 
5 Ver. 22.---ἐπειδή καὶ. it may be rendered: “ For both,” but Kling translates as above.] 
6 Ver. 22.—The plural σημεῖα is better attested: whether it is internally the more probable may be doubted. 


7 Ver. 23.—{6é after ἐπειδή expresses contrariety.] 


8 Ver. 28.---ἔθνεσι is decidedly better attested than the received” Ἕλλησι which arose out of vers. 22and 24. 
9 Ver. 24.—[“‘ avrots δὲ τοῖς κλητοῖς ; the αὐτοῖς serves to identify the called with the believers, ver. 21.”—Alf.] 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[ The connection.—From the mention of his com- 
mission, especially to preach the Gospel, the 
Apostle takes occasion, as it were incidentally, 
to set forth the manner in which this work was 
tobedone. The topic thus introduced has how- 
ever a direct bearing upon the previous one, for 
he handles it in a way both to vindicate his own 
course to which some had taken exception, and 
also to rebuke those tendencies, which, in their 
antagonism to a pure Gospel, had engendered 
contention and schism. ΟΥ̓ the mode of transi- 
tion to this theme Bengel remarks: “1 doubt 
whether it would be approved by the rules of 
Corinthian eloquence. Therefore the Apostle in 
this very passage is furnishing a specimen, so to 


speak, of apostolic folly, and yet the whole is 
arranged with the greatest wisdom.”’ ] 

Vers. 17-21. [The proper mode of preaching 
described first negatively].—Not in wisdom 
of speech.—oix« ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου. It is better to 
join this clause to the word ‘“‘ preach”’ just pre- 
ceding, than to the main statement ‘Christ sent 
me.’ [As to the meaning there are three dis- 
tinct interpretations. 1. That of Calvin and 
others, who place the stress on ‘‘speech,” and 
understand by the phrase ornate and artificial 
discourse in contrast with plain homely speech. 
The objection to this is that it fails to give due 
weight to the word ‘‘ wisdom,” which is used by 
the Apostle in a strict sense throughout the 
chapter, and is the special object of his animad- 











* Leo the great ad Palestinos, Ep. 81. See the passage 
cited in full, Calvin’s Inst. (Lib. III. cap. v. Ὁ 1.). 


84 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





version. 2. That of Olshausen, who takes it to 
denote ‘‘ word-wisdom,”’ ἡ 6., “ἃ wisdom in ap- 
pearance and not in reality,” an interpretation 
which de Wette justly styles ‘‘sonderbar.” ὃ. 
That of Storr and Flatt, de Wette and Hodge, 
who, taking the emphasis to be on “" wisdom,” and 
understanding it of the sudject-matter, suppose 
the Apostle to be repudiating here all connec- 
tion with heathen philosophy. But to this it 
may be replied that such repudiation was wholly 
gratuitous, for no one would imagine that in 
preaching the Gospel he would be likely to em- 
ploy the speculations of a secular wisdom. 4. 
That of Meyer and Kling, who while empha- 
sizing ‘‘ wisdom,” understand it as referring to 
the form of discourse. According to this, what 
the Apostle asserts is that he was ποῦ to preach 
the Gospel in a philosophical manner, making it 
a matter of science rather than a vital power for 
the heart and conscience. In such a case the 
Genitive would be used analogously to the He- 
brew construction, where the first noun in con- 
struction qualifies the second. Hence ‘wisdom 
of discourse’? would be=philosophic discourse. 
See Nordheimer Heb. Grammar B. III. ch. v. 4 
801. 2.] So Neander ‘‘ Σοφία Adyou=ocogia ἐν τῷ 
λέγειν, not wisdom absolutely, but the wisdom 
of dialectic demonstration.”’ Indeed it is not to 
be denied that in the course of this paragraph 
both σοφία and λόγος are used also in relation to 
the subject matter, and that this is always more 
or less affected by the mode of exposition. Un- 
questionably it makes a difference whether the 
subject matter is first vitally apprehended by the 
spirit and then creates its own form of expres- 
sion for itself, or whether a form foreign and 
unsuitable is forced upon it, drawn from other 
spheres of life and thought; in other words 
whether the Gospel is proclaimed naturally in 
its divine excellence and simplicity, or whether, 
taken up under the conceptions of an alien phil- 
osophy, and arrayed in the rhetoric and dia- 
lectics of a people still unsanctified (like the 
Greeks for example), it be thus presented to the 
mind. An instance of the latter kind occurred 
not only in the Gnosis of the heretics, but also 
to a certain degree in that of the Alexandrian 
Church of a later period. And probably it was 
with an eye to the beginning of such a tendency 
in the party of Apollos that the Apostle affirmed 
that, according to the will of the Great Commis- 
sioner, it devolved on him not to preach the Gos- 
pel ‘‘in wisdom of speech.” And the expres- 
sion means nothing else than: not in the style of 
a philosopher trained in the rhetoric and dialec- 
tics of the schools, [but in that of a witness, 
bearing testimony to the great facts in and 
through which God had chosen to reveal him- 
self. The reason for this was], lest the Cross 
of Christ be made of none effect.— 
Kevorty7, become empty, void; here according 
to the connection: be robbed of its power and 
influence. By ‘the Cross of Christ” we under- 
stand that death of Christ upon the cross by 
which we are redeemed and reconciled to God. 
This is the centre and kernel of all Gospel 
preaching, by the power of which sinners are 
delivered from the tyranny of sin, and restored 
to a new and divine life. And this cross, he 
says, would be bereft of all efficiency for such 





~ 


results were it set forth in the forms of philoso 
phy, inasmuch as in this way it would serve 
only to call out the assent of the intellect or 
awaken an aesthetic pleasure, while the flesh, 
that is, the corrupt natural life of the selfish 
heart, would remain unaffected. But let the 
cross only be held up before that heart in its di- 
vine simplicity, and it would then display an 
energy destructive of this life. Through it the 
flesh with its affections and lusts would be eru- 
cified. (Gal. vy. 24). But although this blessed 
result is obtained by means of preaching or doc- 
trine, yet it does not follow from this that we are 
to make ‘‘the cross” here equivalent to “the 
doctrine of the cross, or to the doctrine of Christ 
crucified.”” Rather the relation which this clause 
sustains to the foregoing implies that here we 
are to understand the simple fact itself held up in 
its own native majesty and power. [Whatever ob- 
scures or diverts attention from this deprives it 
to that extent of its power]. 

Ver. 18. [The position thus taken he pro- 
ceeds to explain and substantiate from obvious 
facts.—For the preaching (lit: word λόγος) of 
the cross is to them that perish folly, but 
to those that are saved, ourselves, it is 
the power of God.—Here the force of the ar- 
gument is to be found in the second member of 
the antithesis. The first is introduced merely as 
a concession to a supposed objection. The Co- 
rinthians might retort, ‘‘The cross of Christ 
rendered without effect by wisdom of speech! 
Why, your method of preaching is not half so 
taking and effectual as the one you denounce.” 
This the Apostle concedes, but limits its applica- 
bility only to a certain class, to those who are in 
the way of sin and are going to destruction. 
‘These,’ he says, ‘are blind. They have no 
sense of sin, and’see not therefore the wisdom 
of the cross. To them it is folly. But while to 
them I acknowledged it is such as you say, yet 
to those who are in the way of salvation, the 
cross is a thing of power. They see its meaning. 
They feel its disenthralling and life-giving influ- 
ences. And’ it is by what you see of its effect 
among these that you must judge of it”]. Ac- 
cordingly that to which this divine power is as- 
cribed, ‘‘the word of the cross,”’ must be regarded 
as Gospel-preaching in its simplest and most 
unadorned style, the earnest exhibition of the 
great act of redeeming love directly to the heart, 
without human accessories. It is not the doctrine 
about the cross, but the word which presents the 
cross itself in its concrete form and in its plain 
and pungent application to human conditions. 
It is of this he predicates a divine power. But 
this power is manifested only among such as are 
saved—a thought which is brightened by the 
foregoing contrast. In both clauses the sign of 
the Dative ‘‘to” means “in their judgment.” 
But in the one case it is a judgment proceeding 
from a blinded mind, in the other a judgment 
founded upon blessed experience. In reference 
to the first see 2 Cor. iv. 8, 4; to both 2 Cor. ii. 
15,16. To the former it seems absurd to have 
the fact of Christ’s death nakedly held before 
them as the ground of all salvation—to hear a 
voice from the cross calling unto them ‘Look 
unto me and be saved,” because they see no ra- 
tional connection between cause and effect here. 


~ 


CHAP. I. 17-25. 





These are ‘the lost,” ὦ ¢., they are excluded 
from all participation in the blessedness and 
glory of God’s kingdom, and are doomed to bit- 
ter anguish and disgrace. (See 2 Thess. i. 9; 
Rev. xxi. 8; xxii. 15; Mark ix. 43). In con- 
trast with this appears the state of salvation, 
that is, a deliverance from this doom, (see Luke 
vi. 9; Matth. xviii. 11; Jas. iv. 12) which in- 
cludes also a share in the blessedness and glory 
of God’s kingdom. (Comp. 2 Tim. iv. 18; Rom. 
v. 10;: viii. 24). There are here, then, two 
classes of persons contrasted in relation to their 
final lot. For the purpose of designating them 
P. uses the present participles (aToAAmuévorc 
--σωζομένοις) as the ones best sui ἃ, since 


time is not taken into account. It is) aerefore 
not ‘“‘the present for the future” fo/ jhe pur- 
pose of indicating the certainty of the{/ contem- 
plated, nor yet does the present} note the 
progressive development in the cond )η of the 


parties. Nor yet would it be in place here to 
introduce the idea of predestination, as Riickert 
does, taking the terms to denote the divinely ap- 
pointed destiny of two classes, for with Paul this 
idea never occurs in any such way as to exclude 
the idea of a free self-determination, (comp. 2 
Thess. ii. 10; Acts xiii. 46) since to all pro- 
founder contemplation the work of God and the 
act of man in the genesis and development of faith 
are inseparably one. ‘This only must be con- 
ceded that the Apostle’s mode of expression is 
grounded upon a τρόπος παιδείας ; a mode of teach- 
Ing peculiar to him. Paul delights to refer back 
everything at once to the divine superintendence. 
Only in this reference the human receptivity 
or non-receptivity is at the same time in- 
cluded.” Neanper. On ‘the power of God” see 
Rom. i. 6 where the Gospel is said to be ‘the 
power of God to every one that believeth.”” The 
contrast between ‘‘folly” and ‘‘power’”’ is cer- 
tainly not a strict one, but nevertheless a true 
one. As the former implies that the Gospel is, 
according to the judgment of those that perish, 
a weak thing, so does the latter imply that it is 
to the others, a manifestation of divine wisdom; 
or, as the idea of folly excludes that of power, so 
does the idea of power presuppose that of wis- 
dom. 

Ver. 19. Confirmation adduced from Scripture. 
“For it is written [‘‘This formula with its 
following citations is found only in those Epistles 
of Paul which were addressed to churches in 
which there was a large admixture of Jewish 
converts. It does not occur in those written to 
the Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philip- 
pians, which were composed almost entirely of 
Gentile converts. This coincidence between the 
History in Acts and the character of the Epistles 
is evidence of the genuineness of both.” 
Worps.] I will destroy the wisdom of the 
wise and bring to naught the prudence of 
the prudent.’’—This Divine declarationis taken 
from a prophecy of Isaiah, which culminates in 
an announcement of salvation through the Mes- 
siah (Is. xxix. 14, comp. ver. 17 ff.), and, as the 
result and penalty of the hypocritical conduct of 
the Jewish people, proclaims the downfall of the 
wisdom of their wise ones and the vanishing of 
the understanding of the prudent, so that this 
wisdom and understanding should contribute 


88 


-----...... 


nothing towards their deliverance in the day of 
evil. This judicial threatening on the part of 
God was incontrovertibly fulfilled in the times 
of the New Testament. The wisdom of the un- 
godly proves unfit for apprehending the Gospel- 
salvation. In reference to this it loses all its 
availability and appears as nothing worth. The 
citation is not literal, though, according to the 
sense, exact. [It is taken from LXX. with slight 
variation: ἀϑετήσα for κρύψω, and αὐτοῦ omitted 
twice. ‘The prophet makes use of neuter verbs, 
while Paul turns them into the active form by 
making them have a reference to God. They 
are however perfectly the same in meaning. 
‘‘Wisdom perishes,” but it is by the Lord’s de- 
stroying it. ‘Prudence vanishes,” but it is by 
the Lord’s covering it over and effacing it.—The 
application of this to the subject in hand is this: 
The Lord has been wont to punish the arrogance 
of those who, depending on their own judgment, 
think to be leaders to themselves and others; and 
if this happened among a people whose wisdom 
the other nations had occasion to admire, what 
will become of others?” Catvin]. In reference to 
this subject see the words of Christ: Matth. xi. 
25 ss.; also chap. xv. 7, 8. 

Ver. 20. [The Apostle’s triumphant challenge 
for disproof of this declaration.—Where is a 
wise ? where is a scribe? where isa dis- 
puter of this world ?—The designations here 
are all anarthrous, and Meyer, de Wette, Kling, 
all translate as above. Alford, Stanley, Hodge, 
Barnes, insert the article. The difference in 
meaning is plain, though not important. Inthe 
one case the inquiry is after the person men- 
tioned, g. d., ‘Where is a wise man to be found?’ 
as though he were not. Inthe other the question 
is, ‘What has become of him conceding that he ex- 
ists?’ The latter better suits the drift of the text. 
—There is a question also as to whether these 
words likewise are cited from the Old Testament. 
There is something like them to be found in Is. 
xxxiii. 18, uttered ‘‘in a burst of triumph over 
the defeat of Sennacherib,”’ and Stanley consi- 
ders them as taken from thence. But as the 
Apostle is here evidently speaking in his own 
name, we can regard his language as no more 
than an undesigned imitation of that of the 
Prophet—a lingering echo of it freely reproduced 
to suit a present purpose. He is here appealing 
in his own name to existing facts by way of con- 
firmation. Where is the wise? ete. So Cavin]. 
They have vanished, They pass for nothing in 
the Divine economy. So far as it is concerned, 
they are as if they had never been. His mode of 
challenge occurs also elsewhere with Paul (xv. 
55; Rom. iii. 27, 29, 31.)—The last attributive: 
‘‘of this world,” belongs, although not grammati- 
cally, (since the questions are rapid and abrupt), 
yet logically, to all the three terms, and describes 
those mentioned as belonging to the lower stage 
of human development, the Prae-Messianic period. 
This old world, so far as it seeks to maintain it- 
self still, even after that which is perfect has 
come in Christ, shows itself to be perverse and 
at enmity with God; yea, as in itself evil, because 
pervaded with error and sin. Comp. Gal. i. 4, 
“from the present evil world.” Here the term 
rendered ‘‘world” is αἰών and more properly 
denotes ὦ period of time, an age of the world. 


86 





The antithesis to thisis αἰὼν ἐκεῖνος or μέλ- 
λων: that age, or: the coming age. (NO 
- 


D Vy): This is a course of existence founded 
4 


on the redemptive work of Christ, and includes 
in itself all the impulsive forces and power of the 
new life. Until the end of ‘*this age,” the ‘*com- 
ing age,” willbe in a germinal state, enclosed and 
restricted within the envelope of the present; 
but then it will burst into open manifestation as 
the sole reality. The αἰὼν οὗτος: present 
age, is identical with ὁ κόσμος: this world. 
The only distinction is that the latter designates 
the sphere of life itself as one essentially godless 
and corrupt in its on-goings, especially the hu- 
man race as alienated from the lite of God, while 
the former indicates the period of time through 
which it continues. Hence in Eph. ii. 2 we see 
the two united in one phrase. αἰὼν τοῦ κόσ- 
μου τούτου: the course of this world. The 
present age, as the period of the rule of sin and 
error, has for its god or governing principle the 
devil, as in 2 Cor. iv. 4 he is denominated ‘the 
god of this world,’ and in Jno. xii. 81 ‘the ar- 
chor or ruler of this world.’ In so far now as 
the Jews also in their hostility to the perfect 
revelation of God in Christ, by which they be- 
came blinded to the nature of earlier revelations, 
also (2 Cor. iii. 14 ff.) belonged to this corrupt 
age, and inasmuch as in the progress of this dis- 
cussion the Jewish element also is brought up to 
view, we shall be obliged to understand by the 
‘‘wise”’ here mentioned, Jewish as well as Pagan 
sages, (not the one or the other exclusively); and 
since the Apostle afterwards speaks of wisdom 
only, it may be well perhaps to take the term 
‘‘wise” in a general sense as denoting all those 
who were devoted to the higher science, or at 
least pretended to be such; and the other two 
terms as specific, ‘‘the scribe’ denoting the 
wisdom-seekers among the Jews—and ‘the dis- 
puter,” the like among the Greeks. Such ap- 
propriation of the terms is supported by the 
fact that according to the uniform usage of the 
New Testament (Acts xix. 35 alone excepted) 
* scribe” is the designation of the Jewish learned 
class. But the otherterm, ov 7 τητῆς, which 
is best translated : ‘‘disputer” (comp. σνζητεῖν 
Mark viii. 11 ff.; συζήτησις Acts xv. 2.7; 
XXvili. 29), and hence denotes a class of persons 
who make disputing their business and have facil- 
ity in it, can be only incidentally applied to the 
Sophists then widely spread throughout the Hel- 
lenic world. So Meyer. But would it not be 
more suited to the rhetorical character of the 
passage to make no such disposition of terms, but 
merely to abide by the general fact that the 
Apostle had in his eye men who boasted of their 
learning and science and ready abilities, and as 
inasters of the truth looked down contemptuously 
upon the masses—men who were to be found 
among the Jews as well as among the Greeks,— 
and that only in the word ‘scribe’ there is a 
prevailing reference to the Jew? [Stanley, who 


takes ver. 20 as a modified citation from Is. | 


xxxiii. 18, says ‘These expressions acquire ad- 
ditional force by a comparison with the Rabbini- 
cal belief that the cessation of Rabbinical wisdom 
was to be one of the signs of the Messiah’s coming 
(see the quotations from the Mishna in Wetstein 











THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


-- ---.... 


ad loc.), and that this was expressly foretold in Is. 
xxxiii. 18. Analogous to this was the belief of 
Christians that the oracles of the heathen world 
ceased on the birth of Christ ’’]. i 

The challenge is strengthened by a further 
question—hath not God made foolish the 
wisdom of this world ?—i. ὁ. actually demon- 
strated that it is not what it professes to be; but 
rather, folly—unreason, stupidity, incapacity for 
knowledge in relation to the highest matters. 
[‘‘We must here carefully notice these two things 
that the knowledge of all the sciences is mere 
smoke, where the heavenly science is wanting; 
and man with all his acuteness is as stupid for 
obtaining of himself a knowledge of the mysteries 
of God as an assis unqualified for understanding 
musical harmonies.—Paul (however) does not 
expressly condemn either man’s natural perspic- 
uity, or wisdom acquired from practice and ex- 
perience, or the cultivation of mind obtained by 
learning ; but only declares that all this is of ne 
avail for acquiring spiritual wisdom.—We must 
restrict what he here teaches to the specialties 
of the case in hand.” Catviy]. 

Ver. 21.—Shows why and how it was that 
God had made foolish the wisdom of this world. 
—For since in the wisdom of God, the 
world by wisdom knew not God, it 
pleased God through the foolishness of 
preaching [κήρνγμα, not κήρυξις, not so much 
the preaching as the thing preached, though not 
without an implication of the former] to save 
them that believe.—The relation of the pre- 
mise to the conclusion is that of a sequence, 
divinely ordained in the way of punishment [ra- 
ther of mercy], so that in the first man’s guilt 
[rather guilty impotence, see below], is assigned 
as the ground of what is stated in the other. 
From this we perceive the incorrectness of Riic- 
kert’s view, who, snuffing predestination every- 
where, explains the phrase ‘‘in the wisdom of 
God” to mean: ‘‘in virtue of God’s wisdom, its 
leading and appointment.” Neither does it con- 
sist with the relation of the two clauses to ex- 
plain it of the wisdom of God’s plan of salvation 
in the Gospel (Mosheim and others); for the 
refusal to ‘recognize this wisdom was not any- 
thing to which the divine determination spoken 
of in the second clause could be referred, as to 
something definitely concluded upon. To this 
it must be added that from the very beginning, 
before the disposition of men in relation to it 
could be ascertained, the preaching of the Gospel 
had for the world the appearance of folly. The 
case is entirely different in chap. ii. 6. Rather 
we must here understand a reference to some- 
thing prior to Christ, to certain exhibitions of 
Divine wisdom previous to the revelation made in 
Christ, in and through which man could or ought 
to have discerned God,—to its sway in nature and 
history, and indeed not merely to that revelation 
alluded to in Rom. i. 18 ff; Acts xiv. 17; xvii. 
24 ff, but also to the ordinances of this wisdom 
in the guidance of the covenant-people, who, 
because of their unbelief (with the exception of 
the “election,” Rom. xi. 7), belonged together 
with the world. Neander, on the contrary, dis- 
covers here only a contrast instituted between 
revelation and the religion of reason, and regards 
the wisdom of the Greeks as the particular object 


CHAP. I. 17-25 





of whose relation to Christianity the Apostle is 
treating. But this interpretation is opposed by 
the fact that in the vv. 22-24 closely connected 
by ἐπειδή: since, with v. 21, Paul three times ex- 
pressly states that by ‘‘the world,” in y. 21, not 
only the heathen but also the Jews are intended. 
But does not the declaration in reference to the 
heathen that, they ‘‘did not know God” conflict 
with Rom. i. 21 where it said that ‘when they knew 
God they glorified him not as God?’ We must here 
distinguish between that sense of a God forced 
upon the mind by a revelation of God, a merely 
passive religious notion, the ineffectualness of 
which is set forth even in the passage above 
referred to, and that living knowledge of God, 
which inyolves communion with Him, and which 
is the thing here denied of the world and which, 
had the world possessed, it would have qualified 
the world for the comprehension of that more 
perfect revelation in Christ which was to be the 
fulfilment and consummation of all that had gone 
before, so that had this knowledge existed sucha 
decree of God as is affirmed in the second clause 
would not have been made, nor would the preach- 
ing of the Gospel have been to them foolishness. 
The ‘“‘wisdom” then, ‘‘through” which the 
world knew not God (διὰ τῆς codiac), denotes that 
intelligence by means of which the knowledge 
of God ought to have been attained, but was not. 
It is the appropriate organ of the human mind, 
sharpened by culture, through which God is 
perceived and recognized as He displays Himself 
in His wisdom; in other words, the eye for dis- 
cerning God’s light. But this proved itself 
disqualified for its proper end, since the world, 
the possessor of this wisdom, had become 
alienated from the truth and love of God, and 
hence perverted and darkened by error and sin. 
The translation, ‘‘on account of their wisdom,”’ as 
though this was the cause of their not perceiving 
God would require the accusative (διὰ τὴν cod 
av). It might still be questioned whether the 
phrase ‘‘through wisdom” does not refer like 
the previous one to the wisdom of God, so that it 
has its corresponding antithesis in the phrase, 
“through the foolishness of preaching.” This 
is Bengel’s view. ‘‘In the wisdom of God, i. e. 
because the wisdom of God was so great. By 
wisdom, namely, that of preaching, as is evident 
from the antithesis, by the foolishness of preach- 
ἐπ. So, too, Fritsche (Hall, Lit. Zeit. 1840). 
‘‘After that, in the wisdom of God, ἡ, 6. while God 
allowed His wisdom to shine forth, the world did 
not recognize God, through the wisdom made 
available for them by God, then God resolved to 
choose means of directly the opposite kind. In 
setting forth the antithesis here, it occurred to 
him to emphasize strongly the wisdom of God, 
which failed of attaining its end.” But all things 
considered, the view carried out by us merits the 
preference, and the repetition of ‘‘the wisdom of 
God” must always appear somewhat artificial.* 


* {Kling has hardly done justice to the view which he 
calls Riickerts, and stigmatizes as Predestinationism. There 
certainly is no little plausibility, and much fair ground in 
Scripture for interpreting, “in the wisdom of God” to mean 
“according to the wise ordination or arrangement of God.” 
All the movements of the ante-Christian period were un- 
qnestionably so disposed by Providence as to prepare the 
way for the coming, and the reception of Christ. And why 
may it not have been a part of the Divine plan to allow the 








87 





The judgment [rather the merciful pleasure] 
of God towards a world not recognizing Him in 
consequence of its own sin, is introduced by the 
phrase εὐδόκησεν ὁ ϑεός,--- Οὔ was pleased— 
hence ‘‘ concluded,” ‘determined.’ It indicates 
here not so much the freedom or pure favor, 
from which the resolve proceeded, as the suit- 
ableness of his proceeding to the end contem- 
plated, or to the circumstances of the case. We 
find it first among the later Scripture writers, 
and most commonly in the Sept. In the New 
Testament it occurs chiefly in Paul (Rom. xv. 
26; Gal. i. 15 ff.). In reference to the ex- 
pression and thought comp. Luke x. 21. The 
world had shown itself incapable of discerning 
God in His wisdom through its wisdom. There- 
fore God found it good no more to appeal to hu- 
man wisdom by the manifestations of His wis- 
dom, but by the foolishness of preaching 
to save them that believe,—. 6ὁ., by a pro- 
clamation, the contents of which carried the im- 
press of folly, or must need appear foolish to the 
world as it was. This was to deliver from sin and 
wrath, and introduce to everlasting blessedness 
those who should believe in what was declared. 


In other words, the determination was, to appeal 


to faith instead of to reason. [So Hopae: ‘The 
foolishness of preaching means the preaching of 
foolisness, ὃ. e., the cross.”” But is there not an 
allusion to the nature of the preaching itself as 
being distinct from philosophical disquisition in 
the simplicity of its method. Preaching is her- 
alding, proclaiming facts and messages, a foolish 
matter for those who delight in the subtleties 
and arguments of philosophy.] From this it is 
clear [?] that the phrase “through foolishness 
of preaching” does not furnish, as might ap- 





world to try its own wisdom, and test its capacities to the 
utmost, in order that its utter inefficiency for discovering God, » 
and finding out a means of salvation, might be fully proved 
and thus that consciousness of ignorance and inability be 
awakened, which is one of the first conditions of simple 
faith in revelation? Paul hinted at this very truth in his 
speech at Athens (Acts xvii. 26, 27). “And hath made of one 
blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the 
earth; and hath determined the limes before appointed, and 
the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek the 
Lord, if happily they might feel after Him and find Him, 
though He be not far from every one of us.” This interpre- 
tation carries therefore a legitimate and Scriptural sense, 
and it is preferred by Alf., Barnes, Poole, and most American 
sermonizers. 

But there is still another interpretation, worthy of consi- 
deration, as having the advantage of giving to the important 
word “ wisdom” a uniformity of meaning throughout the 
entire passage. What Paul is here controverting is the 
fondness for philosophic speculation so characteristic of the 
Greeks, and which in the Corinthian Church was threaten- 
ing to destroy the practical nature of Christianity, and turn 
it into another scheme of philosophy. This tendency, or 
rather its products, the Apostle calls “ wisdom” (σοφία), and 
it is, as he says, something he would not indulge in, however 
pleasing to the Corinthian temper. One reason for this was, 
the utter inefficiency of all philosophy in the matter of relt- 
gion. He does not condemn it absolutely, but relatively to 
the ends in view. This, therefore, it became him distinctly 
to state, which he does in verses 20,21, may be paraphrased 
thus: “For since in its speculations concerning God, the 
word through speculation and philosophy did not know God, 
it pleased God through “the announcement of the simple 
facts of the ‘tospel, which to a speculative mind seems like 
fclly: to save those who accept them in mere faith.” We 
thus take σοφία---φιλοσοφία, make τοῦ θεοῦ the objective 
Genitive, and interpret the whole phrase “in the wisdom 
of God,” as denoting the sphere of thought in reference to 
which the Apostle was speaking. This was in fact theosophy, 
a word compounded of just the ones here associated. The 
antithesis then in the two clauses would be between philo~ 
sophy and preaching, between scientific knowledgs and faith, 
accepting the simple proclamation of the Gospel]. 


88 


pear to be the case at first sight, the contrast to 
the phrase ‘this wisdom,’’* but to the other, 
“in the wisdom of God;”’ and the antithesis to 
“‘this wisdom” is to be sought in ‘ them that be- 
lieve.” Faith is pure receptivity, and as such is 
directly the opposite of all endeavors after 
knowledge by the unaided powers of the intel- 
lect, such as are peculiar to human wisdom. It 
is the humble acceptance and appropriation of 
the testimony concerning Christ crucified, in 
spite of all the objections which the understand- 
ing of the natural man may urge against the 
doctrine of salvation, and in the utter renuncia- 
tion of one’s own opinions, and in the entire re- 
pudiation of predominant theories. Inthe act 
of believing there are united, therefore, both hu- 
mility and courage. Finally, there is still an- 
other correspondence in the words ‘‘know” and 
“save.” Knowledge ought to lead to salvation 
(comp. Jno. xvii. ὃ). Not knowing, therefore, 
hindered the obtaining of salvation. 

Vers. 22-24. Modein which the Apostle fulfilled 
the good pleasure of God expressed in ver. 21.— 
Since both Jews require signs and 
Greeks seek after wisdom, we therefore 
on the contrary preach Christ crucified. 
—[So Kurne translates the passage. But there is 
a question here as to the construction. This 
verse, like the previous one, begins with ἐπειδή. 
It may therefore be taken as a parallel to that, 
(so Hodge, Meyer), resuming the thought and 
amplifying it (so Stanley), and like the preced- 
ing having a protasis + and apodosis (as Kling); 
or it may be joined by ἐπειδή directly to the 
previous clause, and regarded as explanatory 
of what is said of the “foolishness of preaching” 
being the means of saving believers (so Alford, 
Calvin, Riickert, de Wette). In this case the 
second clause instead of being an apodosis 
would be directly dependent on ἐπειδύ, and the 
rendering would be:—Since, or seeing that, 
while both Jews require signsand Greeks 
seek after wisdom, we on the other 
hand preach Christ, etc.—Thigs seems to us 
the most natural rendering. See Winer, P. iii. 
@ lxv. 6. But Kling rejects it as ‘the less suit- 
able.” According to his view], what the pro- 
tasis states is the result of ‘‘not knowing God” 
(ver. 21); what the apodosis states is the judi- 
cial procedure corresponding to it as carried out 
in “the foolishness of preaching,” viz., a refusal 
to yield to vain demands for wisdom, and the 
counter preaching which appears to those mak- 
ing these demands as absurd, but which to be- 
lievers proves to be the power of God and the 
wisdom of God. The ἐπειδῇ introduces a case 
well known and made out: since indeed; the ὃ ἐ 
Seed ἡμεῖς) is used also elsewhere in the apo- 

osis after ἐπεί and érecdj to make the antithetic 
relation of this clause the more prominent: 
therefore, on the contrary (comp. Meyer on this 
passage). This construction is favored by the par- 





[* One would suppose that the naturalness and indeed in- 
evitableness of this contrast would have shown the incor- 
rectness of Kling’s interpretation. (See Winer. part iii. sect. 
47, ἃ.) Paul means here to set the simple “testimony of 
Jesus” over against “ philosophy” or “ wisdom,” and the 
method of faith over against the method of reason. In all 
that follows he is correct. ] 

[ΠῚ Rob. in Lex. observes that ἐπειδή is never used in the 
protasis. ] 











THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—_ - ς΄’: 


allelism between the protasis and apodosis in ver, 
21. andthose here found. The «at,—xac: both,—a 
and, unite here classes alike in one respect, i. δ.» 
in the unwarrantableness of their demands, but 
otherwise diverse, and they belong not exclu- 
sively to the subjects mentioned (Jews and 
Greeks), but serve to connect the two clauses in 
one whole: ‘‘since it is so, that both Jews re- 
quire signs and Greeks seek wisdom.” Jews 
and Greeks here represent two classes of men ac- 
cording to their peculiar characteristics. Hence 
they are mentioned without the article. It is as 
if he said ‘‘ since people like the Jews seek, ete.” 
The Greeks here as in Rom. i. 16, and elsewhere, 
stand as pars pro toto, for the Gentiles generally, 
who, according to the most probable reading, 
are mentioned afterwards in ver. 23. They are 
the people who best represent the whole multi- 
tude of nations (417) found outside of the cove- 
nant relation with God, and who, in respect of 
culture and language, prepared the whole civil- 
ized world for Christianity; just as the Jews, 
scattered among them all, did the same thing in 
respect of religion, being freighted with the pro- 
mise which was to be fulfilled in Christ. It was 


among these two nations that Christianity πᾶ 


its first sphere of operations,—the Jews, who had 
the first claim to announce the fulfilment of that 
promise which had been preserved, and of that 
hope which had been awakened by them (comp. 
Acts xiii. 46; iii. 25; Rom. 1. 16; xy. 8), and 
the Greeks, who had carried out the work of 
human culture in science and art, and had, as it 
were, taken the whole civilized world in posses- 
sion, and so had furnished the most perfect form 
for the human appropriation of the truth of 
revelation, and so the richest receptivity for the 
life and truth which were in Christ, and which 
were fitted to ensure them the most perfect satis- 
faction. But in both alike did Christianity en- 
counter peculiar obstructions. The Jews clave 
to the external form of revelation, the miracle; 
and they did this to such a degree as to insist on 
having it before their eyes in its most striking, 
dazzling form, as the condition of their accep- 
tance of the truth. They thus betrayed their 
fundamental unbelief and disaffection for the 
truth which rebuked their sin, humbled their 
pride, and demanded of them entire self-denial. 
This is what is meant by their ‘“‘seeking after a 
sign,” or, according to another reading, ‘‘ signs.” 
(Comp. Jno. iv. 48; and Matt. xii 88; xvi. 4; 
Luke xi. 16; Jno. ii. 18; vi. 80). (Meyer, Ed. 8.) 
“Signs, that is, miraculous tokens, by which 
Jesus, whom the Apostles asserted to be risen 
from the dead and ascended on high, should 
prove Himself to be the Messiah. These they 
still called for, inasmuch as the miracles of His 
earthly career had lost for them all evidencing 
power, in consequence of His crucifixion”), The 
Greeks, on their part, had been captivated by 
the outward show and glitter of their civiliza- 
tion. Whatever did not appear before them un- 
der the name of a new philosophy (comp. Acts 
xvii. 19 ff.), or was not sustained by philosophic 
proof, or was not set forth with logical and rhe- 
torical art, this they refused to accredit; and by 
insisting on wisdom only in a form agreeable to 
them, they likewise betrayed their unbelief and 
their aversion to that Divine truth which re 


as 


CHAP. 


I, 17-25. 89 





quired a mortification of their vain self, with all 
its pride of science and art, and which demanded 
a humble surrender to a revelation in Christ 
that infinitely surpassed all their attainments. 
Thus on both sides, in modes diverse and con- 
ditioned by their peculiar histories, did the Same 
opposition arise to the preaching of the Gospel 
which held up to their faith the one Christ, who 
was declared to have secured the salvation of 
mankind, and built up the way to regal glory, 
not through wondrous miracles, according to the 
demand of the Jew, nor through such wisdom as 


wisdom-seekers sought, but by suffering the | 


shameful death of a malefactor. Thus did the 
preaching of the Apostles and their associates 
(ἡμεῖς) concerning a crucified Messiah, their 
public proclamation of this fact and its signifi- 
cance in all simplicity, prove for the Jews a 
stumbling block, 7. 6., an offence, a hinderance 
to faith, the occasion of a fall, something caus- 
ing them to err (comp. πρόσκομμα Rom. ix. 32ff.). 
A person hanging on the accursed tree presented 
such a contrast to all their desires for some 
glorious exhibition of power (such as destruction 
to their enemies, etc.), that they could do no 
otherwise than reject Him. [‘‘ They could have 
tolerated Christ on the mount, but not Christ on 
the cross.”—A. Butter].—For the Greeks 
(Gentiles) foolishness.—Thatsalvationcould 
come to the world through a crucified Jew ap- 
peared to them plainly absurd. It was an in- 
strumentality utterly inadequate to the end pro- 
posed. Thus while to the Jews such a person 
was an object of horror, as one accursed of God, 
to the Gentiles he was an object only for scorn 
and contempt. (Comp. Acts xxiii. 18-32; Luke 
xxiii. 36-41). To this, however, there is a noble 
contrast. 

But unto these—the called—Christ the 
power of God and the wisdom of God.— 
This clause might be taken to depend on ‘‘we 
preach,” so that this would be repeated in thought, 
and ‘Christ the wisdom of God”’ form an antithe- 
sis to ‘‘Christ crucified” with its adjuncts: We 
preach Christ as crucified, who for the Jew is a 
stumbling block, etc., but to those who are 
called we preach Christ as the power of God. 
BENGEL appears to suggest this, when to ‘‘Christ” 
he adds ‘‘with his cross, death, life, kingdom,” 
and says further, ‘‘ When the offence of the cross 
is overcome, the whole mystery of Christ lies 
open.”—But the course of thought would be 
more simple if we put ‘Christ crucified” di- 
rectly in opposition with what precedes: ‘*We 
preach a crucified Messiah who to the Jews is a 
stumbling block, etc.—but to them who are 
called, Christ—the power of God.” By it then 
is signified, that He, the crucified one, at whom 
the Jews stumble, is to the called, the An- 
ointed of God, (Messiah, Christ),—the One in 
whom the promise of a heavenly king is fulfilled, 
the Power of God, ete. This corresponds also to 
the expression respecting the ‘‘word of the 
cross” in ver. 18. The’ αὐτοῖς: to these 
serves to give prominence to ‘‘the called” as the 
chief persons in the case, who occupy a positive 
relation to ‘‘the crucified,” and enjoy an expe- 
rience corresponding to it. It points at the same 
time to those already mentioned, to ‘‘them that 
believe,” ver. 21, and to the ‘‘sayed,” ver. 18; 





and while the first of these terms designates their 
subjective position towards the Gospel, the sec- 
ond shows the advantage they derive from it. 
The term ‘‘called” indicates the Divine ground 
on which they stand. (On κλητόε: called, 
comp. ver. 2). By the addition of: both Jews 
and Greeks he gives us to understand that in 
the purpose of grace denoted in their calling the 
separation hitherto existing between these par- 
ties had been removed. (Comp. Rom. ix. 24 and 
x. 12).—the power of God and the wisdom 
of God.—Here we have the antithesis to ‘“‘stum- 
bling block”? and ‘‘foolishness.” While the 
Jews were asking how a person crucified and 
accursed could possibly be the Saviour of Israel, 
how one so utterly devoid of strength could be 
able to overthrow all hostile power, and the 
Greeks were deeming it absurd to expect salva- 
tion from one who came to so miserable an end, 
the chosen of God were, on the contrary, expe- 
riencing and confessing that from this very cru- 
cified Redeemer there issued a Divine power, the 
power of a heavenly life and peace, a renewing, 
sanctifying, beatific power, such as could be 
found in nothing creaturely, and that accord- 
ingly Christ was the possessor of such a Divine 
power, that in Him there existed a Divine wisdom 
that was capable of solving the hardest problems, 
of lighting up the darkness that rested on the 
ways of God, of fulfilling God’s noblest purposes 
of bringing men back from all their wanderings 
into the path of life and of introducing them at 
last to their final destination. 

Ver. 25. A general proposition, substantiating 
what has just been said.—Because the fool- 
ishness of God is wiser than men, and 
the weakness of God mightier than men. 
—tThe phrase ‘foolishness of God” is not to be 
taken too abstractly, as if it meant the Divine 
folly. The Apostle is evidently here speaking 
from a human point of view and implies merely 
that which appears foolishness in God. He here 
has in mind God’s dealings with men in the Gos- 
pel, such as the procuring of salvation through 
the crucifixion of Christ, and other things con- 
nected therewith, which in the judgment of self- 
styled wise men of this world, who measure every 
thing by the measure of their fancied wisdom, 
appeared contrary to reason. Now of this ap- 
parent foolishness of God he affirms that it sur- 
passed in real wisdom all men however wise they 
seemed to be in their own sight, or were held to 
be by others, or whatever they might be able to 
reason out or imagine. Ina similar manner we 
must interpret the following expressson, the 
weakness of God —By this he means a Divine 
scheme which seemed weak to those who held 
merely to physical forceand boasted in that (for 
instance, the procuring of redemption through 
one subjecting himself to the humiliation of death 
on the cross), but which in fact is stronger 
than men, 7. ¢., exerts a mightier power than 
they with all their imagined strength and prow- 
ess. Bence adds: ‘Although they may appear 
to themselves both wise and strong, and wish to 
be the standards of wisdom and strength.” Thus 
interpreted, it would be needless to construe the 
words ‘‘than men’ as involving a figure of 
speech in which a comparison instituted with a 
person or thing as a whole, properly applies only 


40 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a a a πΞ σ-πχ:--ἰτὸνΙν τα αὐ οι πἕἰπι 


to a part of it, or to some quality in it, as though 
they meant: ‘than the wisdom of men,” or 
“than the strength of men.” Both interpreta- 
tions, however, amount to the same thing.—There 
is still another construction suggested by what 
follows, viz.: that by the foolishness and the 
weakness of God are meant the persons themselves 
who are “called” (ver. 24), who experience Christ 
crucified as ‘‘the wisdom of God and the power of 
God,” so that they in consequence become Di- 
vinely wise and strong, and are thus enabled as 
the foolishness and weakness belonging to God 
to surpass men, ¢. 6. that portion of the race who 
remain out of Christ in wisdom and power. 
“The thought is this—Human nature delights in 
doing great things. God, on the contrary, in His 
earthly dispensations always appears weak and 
small at the first, and not until afterwards re- 
veals the overwhelming power that is concealed 
in His instrumentalities.”” NEANDER. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Christ and His cross— Christ crucified.— 
This is the clear light from Heaven, which comes 
to scatter all the darkness of man’s sinful life. 
This is the key to all the riddles of a history that 
has been deranged and confused by falsehood and 
sin. All God’s revelations in the Old Testament, 
his ordinances, institutions, promises, judgments 
and blessings here reach their fulfilment and find 
their real explanation. All the hints of truth 
current among heathen nations—all their sigh- 
ing and striving after the knowledge of God and 
communion with Him, all attempts to get rid of 
the vonsciousness of guilt, to atone for sin and to 
effect a perfect restoration to Divine favor—all 
the labor of the wise to discover a clue for the 
great labyrinth of human life—in short every 
thing which glimmered as a ray of light here and 
there in this darkness, obtains in Christ its pro- 
per goal; and in so far as it at last leads to the 
apprehension of this perfect light and salvation, 
it has been not in vain. Here is the ‘power of 
God” which in place of a thousand-fold yet vain 
endeavor on the part of man is able to insure a 
true Diviné life, an undisturbed peace, an all 
pervading sanctification—spreading from the in- 
most centre of a heart that embraces the holy, 
forgiving love of God,—and an invincible patience 
and steadfastness combined with the serenest 
tranquillity amid allthe plagues, diseases, adver- 
sities and conflicts which may assail us from 
within and without. Here, too, is the wisdom of 
God. From this the deepest problems of human 
knowledge and human activity receive light, so 
that they can be recognized in their truth and in 
the goal to which they tend; and right methods 
of solution for them may be attained. Here the 
eternal thoughts of God, and the thoughts of 
man which spring up responsive to these out of 
the inmost truth of the human heart through the 
operation of the all-enlightening Logos, encoun- 
ter each other. Here redeeming love with its 
wondrous plan of forgiveness and regeneration 
meets the manifold devices and strivings of man 
for the removal of guilt and, the acquisition of 
the chief good, and gives them a perfect satis- 
faction, 





2. Christ and His cross—as confronting the 
world.—But the more this revelation of God in a 
crucified Saviour surpasses all the doings of 
man hitherto, the less can it be measured by the 
standard of truth and goodness existing among 
men, the less can it come within the scope of 
their ordinary conceptions. Where, therefore, 
the heart has not been renewed by a surrender 
to the truth foreshadowed by its mysterious 
need and corresponding to it, and so no change 
has been wrought in the whole course of thought, 
there this revelation remains an incomprehensible 
mystery; and where to the indolence, which refuses 
to stir out of the old beaten track, there is added 
an arrogant pride, which, with arbitrary exag- 
geration and embellishments insists on making 
what already exists the measure of the new and 
rejects whatever does not suit the demands thus 
originated, there, it is certain, that the revelation 
of God will be violently opposed. And this willbe 
so much the more sure to occur, when, for the 
sake of presenting a contrast with the vain 
parade of carnal self in adhering to what is ex- 
ternally imposing and brilliant, and in cleaving 
to its own productions which seem so beautiful 
and fair, the revealed truth and grace are con- 
strained to show themselves in an unpretending 
form, putting contempt upon the proud display 
of might by assuming a lowly aspect of weakness 
and setting at naught a lofty pretentious wisdom 
by wearing the guise of foolishness in order to 
lift humanity thereby out of the vanity of its 
conceited claims, and out of the arbitrariness of 
its own devices and endeavors, into the experi- 
ence of a true divine power and wisdom.— 
But the cross and its preaching, which prove 
such a stumbling block and foolishness to 
those who are bound up: in their vain conceit 
becomes to those who obey the heavenly calling 
in faith and who in the mortification of self with 
all its foolish conceits and pretensions yield 
themselves to the influences of the grace and 
truth in Christ, and in so doing experience its 
enlightening, sanctifying and beatific power, the 
wisdom of God and the power of God. Thus it 
happens that men with all their wisdom and power 
remain far inferior to what belongeth unto God, 
however foolish and weak it may seem. 

8. ‘Vers. 22-24 afford us a point of observa~ 
tion which enables us to survey Church Histore 
in clearest light. The Apostles found two dis 
tinct tendencies setting inin strong hostility to the 
Gospel, the desire for miracles, and the conceit 
of wisdom. These two tendencies show them- 
selves repeatedly through all times. A false, 
one-sided supernaturalism and a false one-sided 
rationalism are ever in rivalry with each other 
either to resist the Gospel in open enmity or to 
disturb and corrupt it by secretly insinuating 
themselves into it. It may be said that all ex~ 
ternal opposition and all internal peril to the 
Gospel resolve themselves at last into these two 
opposite principles. So long as a pure Gospel 
withstands and excludes these it will sueceed in 
satisfying the genuine human needs lying at their 
foundation and in thus quieting them on both sides. 
This proves itself to be the true wonder-working 
power before which all other miracles must pale, 
and the true wisdom of God before which all 
other wisdom must be put to shame, and thus 





CHAP. I. 17-25. 





does it exhibit itself in both ways as the absolute 
Religion.” NEANDER. 

4, [Since it is ‘to the called” that the Gos- 
pel proves ‘‘the power of God and the wisdom of 
God,” by bringing them at last to believe and 
be saved, it follows that the difference in the 
effects produced by the Gospel, so that on the 
one hand it appears to some as an offence and to 
others as foolishness, but to others still as a means 
of salvation, is all owing to the calling of God— 
his effectual calling. ] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


1. The cross of Christ is made of none effect by 
cunning words or the wisdom of speech.—For the 
wisdom of speech is 1, on the one hand scholastic 
wisdom which a. culminates only in knowledge, 
not in reformation; ὦ. gives no satisfaction on 
the chief point, Religion; 6. being in constant 
strife with itself evermore corrupts rather than 
improves; 2, On the other hand an artificial 
rhetoric, which springs not from the heart or 
from zeal for a cause known to be true, but 
aims only to dazzle and please, and by this 
means to persurde. But a mode of proceeding 
so altogether unworthy of heavenly truth robs 
the cross of Christ of its peculiar power; sincea. 
the attention is turned away from the subject to 
the speaker, and so the heart is diverted and 
betrayed into vanity; ὁ. and everything is viewed 
according to its fitness to delight; δ. and the 
effect is ascribed not to the power of the truth 
presented but to the eloquence displayed. After 
HEvuBNER. 

2. The preaching of the cross. 1, is foolishness 
for those who are lost. a. Who are these? They 
are such as are hardened in their own guilt— 
such as follow their own perverted sense and 
will not accept of truth or consent to self-humili- 
ation, so that humanly judging there is nothing 
to be hoped for from them. 6. Why is the 
preaching of the cross foolishness for them? 
Because to the world, which insists on its own 
importance, everything appears absurd which 
fells its pride, destroys its meritoriousness and 
conflicts with its wisdom and righteousness. 2, 
ts a wisdom of God unto us who are called.—The be- 
liever who permits himself to be saved, awakened 
and enlightened by the spirit of God, finds in the 
cross a divinely derived and divinely operating 
power, which draws the heart into peace with 
itself and with God, fills it with holy love, and 
strengthens it with a new power of life; and he 
recognizes therein a wisdom far surpassing all 
human thought and sense. After HeuBNeER. 

3. The vanity of scholastic wisdom or the judg- 
ment of God upon conceited worldly wisdom.—l. It 
effects nothing, because it aims only at show and 
not at improvement. 2. God allows it to be 
betrayed into folly and shame, because it seeks 
to be wise and strong without God, without 
prayer and piety. 3. Christianity exposes it in 
all its barrenness, since, while Christianity re- 
news humanity, worldly wisdom perishes in its 
own schools, and is unable to maintain its own 
progress. After HnuBner. 

4, The causes of the rejection cf the Crucified.—l. 
The Jewish desire for whatever was striking, 
imposing and externally mighty; 2. The Gentile 


41 





conceit of wisdom and a vain misculture; 3. The 
pride of both which sought to comprehend God, 
but which would not enter into the apparently 
weak and foolish ways and means of his economy. 
After HEUBNER. 

5. The preaching of the cross has with those who 
are saved a threefold effect. 1. It shames, inas- 
much as man crucified Christ with his sins; for 
a long time did not recognize him; did not 
honor or thank him; and was willing so long to 
tolerate the sins which nailed Him to the cross. 
2. It humbles, by reminding us of Christ’s own 
love, in that He, the Great God, died for us poor 
worms, and did so much for us when we were 
utterly worthless. It inclines us also to benevo- 
lence towards all men who differ from us only in 
this, that we are sinners saved, while they can 
and may yet be saved. 3. It awakens, gives 
power and life, so that we not only are ready 
and inclined, but also are enabled to love God, 
and to prove our love by works. 

6. The Cross of Christ is an offence to all men 
who think that a good life will ensure them a 
happy end. These are the enemies of the Cross 
in the midst of Christendom. They worship it 
externally; they take pride in it, but in fact 
they hate the doctrine of the Cross. They can- 
not accept the truth that Christ has become our 
Redeemer and that we are saved out of sheer 
mercy, so that the holiest, the most pious, the 
most liberal, the most upright man is just as far 
from Heaven as the most miserable sinner, and 
that there is but one way for all. To the wise 
and prudent the cross of Christ is foolishness. 
The truth that Christ died for us they regard as 
a fable. There are persons even among [nomi- 
nal] believers who take it asa compliment if 
they are said not to believe. Yet should one 
accuse them of holding the truth, and yet of living 
in untruthfulness, disobedience and ingratitude 
towards God, it would be the same as if he 
pronounced them deliberate villains. Oh! could 
they but once hear the Gospel in a way to 
pierce their hearts they would certainly ask, 
What shall we do? Let the doctrine of the Cross 
be once made vital in the soul, then would there 
be no need of exhortation, alarm and threaten- 
ing in view of this or that judgment. It would 
be sufficient to say, ‘‘ The Saviour died for me.” 
If we are in trouble for our sins, and the hope 
of salvation vanishes, and the voice comes, 
‘¢Christ has died and earned salvation for us,” 
how the heart not only seizes but holds fast to 
the declaration! How the truth penetrates like 
a divine power into the soul which can never be 
lost or forgotten! Then are our sins buried in 
the depths of the sea; they can no more tyran- 
nize over us. Then we need sin no more. Such 
is the effect of the Word of the Cross in them 
that believe. GossnER. 

Hepinger: —Power, wit, all human work 
and counsel corrupts faith, misleads in the 
church, and hinders the efficacy of the means 
of grace. In divine things, the more foolish any- 
thing seems to the world, the better it is. 
““Wisdom, wisdom, ready understanding, science, 
learning out of a thousand books!” Such is 
the ery of the world. An evil sound is it in 
the churches and in the schools. One thing is 
needful—one book, one Christ. 


42 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





SrarKxe:—The Gospel has a differencing effect 
according to the character of the persons who 
hear and use it. Mankind’ are divided into two 
classes: 1. Unbelievers; they are such as live on, 
without caring for their salvation, eitherin secu- 
rity or hypocrisy; each word and work of theirs 
is a step toward Hell. 2. Belevers; they are 
those who are in daily concern about their sal- 
vation; and this is with them so yital a point 
that even when unmoved by efforts from abroad, 
while in the midst of their labors or talk, 
they are not easily repelled from it (ver. 18). 
Wisdom is in itself something divine, and before 
the fall the image of God in man consisted in it 
(Col. iii. 10); and even now the inclination to 
know and learn something is a remnant in us of 
this divine image. But if our natural wisdom 
profits us but little now, and is every where 
scandalized, this is the fault, not of wisdom, but 
of our corrupted reason and understanding. 
None of the loftiest and most learned of this 
world ought to be ashamed of the simplicity of 
the Gospel, for God Himself, the highest and 
wisest of all, let Himself down to it. Sufficient 
is it for us that an infinite power resides in the 
Cross to deliver us out of all our deep depravity. 
(ver. 21).—God can never suit people. One 
will have it this way and another that. Shame 
on you! God does asit pleases Him (Matth. xi. 
16 ff.). Mon always delight in what is strange, 
lofty, conspicuous. Instead of desiring that 
God’s name alone should be praised they seek 
themselves in every thing. They look either at 
power, wealth, faculty, or at learning, prudence, 
dexterity. Both are means to greatness, but 
they prove hinderances in the kingdom of God. 
(ver. 22).—God will remain unsurpassed in His 
words and works (Ps. Ixxviii. 41), but their 
wisdom and strength are vain. The world 
makes wisdom to consist in much learning which 
secures honor and regard. But a believer con- 
siders it the height of wisdom to know that he is 
a poor sinner, becomes justified and saved only 
in deepest humility. The greatest power con- 
sists in being able to overcome ourselves and the 
kingdom of Satan. God can put to shame all the 
devices of the craftiest and allithe might of the 
greatest in this world. Why wilt thou fear? 
Look to God! Hecan and will give thee enough 
for all things (ver. 25). 











—_——— ee? 


H. Riecer:—Let him who would even now, 
by the preaching of the Cross, awaken a sense 
of the Cross in the hearts of men, and thereby 
codperate for their salvation, not seek for assis- 
tance from the fickle arts of worldly wisdom, but 
let him observe what renders himself humble 
and subdued, and what he can thus convey with 
a tender spirit to others, and let him shun every 
thing which on the contrary tends to puff himself 
up and wherewith he is tempted to court the fa- 
vor of men. ᾿ ; 

[Spencer: (ver.21).—‘‘Some Christian minis- 
ters sumetimes think to do Christianity a very 
good service by philosophizing it to make it keep 
up with the times. In all this they do Chris- 
tianity no other service than rob it of its power 
by robbing it of its peculiarity, and do no 
other service to the ‘philosophic minds’ which 
they say they would influence, than just to 
mislead them and keep them away from true 
faith in Christ and reliance on his great atone- 
ment. 

Every thing is coming to be philosophized. 
Many a minister in the pulpit—shame on him— 
betrays his trust to the Bible and his God by 
teaching religion very much as if it were a new 
matter of reason, and human progress, and hu- 
man discovery, instead of taking God’s Word as 
his authority and instructor, and uttering in the 
ears of the people like the old prophets, Thus 
saith the Lord God. Beware of such proceedings. 
They tend to infidelity. Learn duty from God. 
The Bible is safe. Philosophy is blind.”’] 

[ Ropertson :—‘‘ Men bow before talent even 
if unassociated with goodness, but between these 
two we must make an everlasting distinction. 
When once the idolatry of talent enters, then 
farewell to spirituality; when men ask their 
teachers, not for that which will make them 
more humble and God-like, but for the excite- 
ment of an intellectual banquet, then farewell to 
Christian progress. Here also St. Paul again 
stood firm. Not Wisdom, but Christ crucified. 
St. Paul might have complied with these require- 
ments of his converts, and then he would have 


gained admiration and love, he would have been ~ 


the leader of a party, but then he would have 
been false to his Master—he would have been 
preferring self to Christ.” ] 


THE TRUE METHOD OF PREACHING. 


(ConTINUED). 


B. As suited to the character of the called and the ends contemplated. 


Cuarter I 26-81. 


26 For ye [om. ye] see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the 
27 flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish 
things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of 


— > 


' 


CHAP. I. 26-31. 





43 





28 the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, 
and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and [om. yea, and]! things. 
29 which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his 


30 presence [the presence of God].’ 


But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God 


[om. of God], is [has been] made unto us wisdom, [from God, ἀπὸ θεοῦ" and [both] 
31 righteousness and sanctification, and redemption: That according ds it is written, He. 
8 Pp ἕ ) 


that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. 


1 Ver. 28.—The καὶ before τὰ μὴ ὄντα is not original. 


[A mistaken supplement of the sense.”—Alf.] 


2 Ver. 29.—Instead of the rec. αὐτοῦ the best authorities read τοῦ θεοῦ. which is repeated by way of emphasis. 
3 Ver. 30.—The best attested order of words is σοφία ἡμῖν ἀπὸ θεοῦ. That in the Rec. ἡμῖν σοφία is to be explained: 
from the tendency toe take copia ἀπὸ θεου together in relation (Meyer). [See below]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[The connection. Kling here, as usual, follows 
Meyer in considering these verses as confirma- 
tory of what immediately precedes ver. 24. It 
were better, however, with de Wette and Hodge, 
to regard the Apostle as introducing here a new 
argument in support of the general position 
taken in the previous section. It is anargument 
drawn from facts directly under their eye. In 
proof of what he had said of the true method of 
preaching and the utter vanity of the worldly 
wisdom they were tempted to prize, they could 
see for themselves what course the Gospel had in 
the main actually taken among them who were 
its converts and what were the ends subserved 
by this. Accordingly he begins by directing at- 
tention to the character of the called, first de- 
scribed negatively ]. 

Ver. 26. Por look at your calling, breth- 
ren.—The verb βλέπετε may be taken in the 


‘Indicative [as in the Εἰ. V.]; but the Imperative 


corresponds better with the animated style of the 
Apostle (see x. 18; Phil. iii. 2). [*‘And is re- 
quired by the emphatic position which the verb 
occupies in thesentence” Aur. So also Words., 
Wickliffe, Tyndale, and the Rheims version]. 
Nor is this at all inconsistent, as Bengel asserts, 
with the use of the ‘‘for;”’ since this is to be found 
elsewhere also in imperative clauses. [Βλέπειν: 
“‘to consider, take to heart, is employed to express 
a more intent, earnest, spiritual contemplation 
than ὁρᾶν. The one denotes mental vision, the 
other bodily sight.”” W. WessTEer]. (Heb. xii. 3). 
The ‘‘calling”’ which they are requested to ob- 
serve is not their secular vocation, or their exter- 
nal circumstances [Olshausen], in which they 
were found when called of the Lord. Nothingis 
said of this in the subsequent context. Nor yet 
can we admit Bengel’s explanation: ‘the state 
in which the heavenly calling proves an offence 
to you.” This anticipates a thought which is 
not mentioned till afterwards. It is more cor- 
rect to understand it of the Divine call, both as 
to the act itself, and the method God pursued in 
calling them, especially in respect to the persons 
whom he had chosen and their condition. [This 
is seen in the very use of terms. ‘‘He does not 
say τὴν κλῆσιν ὑμετέραν, nor τὴν ὑμῶν κλῆσιν but 
τὴν KAjow ὑμῶν: the calling of you.” Worps.]. 
What this was he proceeds to state—how that 
not many wise men after the flesh.—The 
‘flesh’? here denotes the purely human state or 
course of action, as utterly devoid of Divine in- 
fluence or codperation. It is the sensuous and 


‘character. 


selfish life, possessed by sin. Hence a wisdom: 
which is suited to this life, which moves accord- 
ing to its ways instead of after the methods of 
that Divine spiritual principle from which all 
true higher knowledge springs, is “ἃ wisdom of 
this age,” ‘‘of the world” nM 20), earthly, 
godless, and hostile to God. Such is its essential 
Yet without pushing the matter so. 
far, we might simply abide by the idea of what. 
is purely human, (Comp. Herzog’s Theol. Real. 
Ency. under the word “ Fleisch”).*—To attach: 
this qualification to the remaining predicates, 
would be superfluous. These of themselves in-- 
dicate what is external, worldly, and belonging- 
to the lower extra-christian life-—not many 
mighty, duvvaroc: persons of consequence in. 
civil life, influential, powerful, whether it be by- 
wealth or any other means,—not many noble,, 
εὐγενεῖς: of distinguished descent, well-born. In. 
highly-civilized, aristocratic Corinth, all this 
was regarded of great importance.—are called. 
—There is no verb in the original with which 
the above nominatives can agree, and it is 
best to supply the defect [as in the Εἰ. V.] ‘are 
called” from the word ‘‘calling” in the first 
clause. Others prefer ‘‘are,” and take it either 
as the sole predicate of the clause: ‘“‘There are 
not many wise, etc., among you;” or they unite 
with it the adjectives as predicates: ‘Many are 
not wise, etc.” [Some of the Fathers thought 
that the persons employed to dispense this call- 
ing were here meant. So ΤΉΒΟΡΟΒΕΤ. ‘God. 
endorsed the nations in the evangelical net of 
Galilean fishermen.” Also Augustine. ‘Christ. 
caught orators by fishermen, not fishermen by- 
orators.””’ WorpswortH]. The supplying of ‘are: 
called,” suits as well with the preceding words, 
‘your calling,” as with the following, “hath: 
chosen.” ‘In the early centuries it was often. 
flung at Christianity (by Celsus and others), 
that its converts were, for the most part, common. 
people, women and slaves.” Paul here not only 
confesses the fact, but also discovers in it one: 
cause of glory for the Gospel; for it is precisely 
in this that the Gospel displays itself to be the: 
power of God and the wisdom of God, that 
starting from such humble beginnings it had, 
nevertheless both outwardly and inwardly over-- 
come the world. 

Vers. 27, 28. The positive aspect of the case. 
But the foolish things of this world.— 
Luther translates ‘‘in the eyes of the world,” as . 
though the Genitive in the original were that of 


* [See also for a masterly analysis of the Ethical import 
of this word. Miller on Sin. 2 Book, 2 Chap. Also Sarto- 
rius, “ Von der heiligen Liebe.’’] , 


44 





estitmaion. But Paul is here speaking of things 
not as they seem, but as they are; and here, as 
well as in the subsequent Epistles, we have the 
actual quality indicated. ‘The foolish things”’ 
(τὰ wpa), the neuter for the sake of greater ge- 
neralization. We have here a strong contrast 
to ‘the wise,” ὦ. e. whatever is lacking in higher 
cultivation and insight, including, too, the addi- 
tional thought of being deemed foolish, con- 
tracted and simple.—hath God chosen, an 
expression which is repeated three times with 
great emphasis. It denotes the Divine purpose 
which is made known in the calling; or that 
Divine decision in virtue of which a separation is 
effected among fallen mankind, and certain indi- 
vidualsare selected out of it to become a possession 
of God in Christ, and are so made blessed (comp. 
ἐκλέγεσϑαι Eph. 1. 4; Is. xv. 19). The expres- 
sion belongs to the Theocratic language of the Old 


Testament (comp. “fR‘} Deut. xiv. 2ff.). “Fore- 


knowledge” and ‘Predestination ” are cognate 
terms, Rom. viii. 29; 2 Tim. i. 9, yet so, how- 
ever, that the word “choose” here designates 
the free, eternal gracious will of God, as carried 
out in time, and therefore includes the ‘calling”’ 
in itself.—The object of such a choice is to 
confound the wise i. 6. the wise after the 
flesh. By the fact that He selected the “foolish,” 
persons destitute of superior culture, to enjoy 
holy and blessed communion with Him, the wis- 
dom in which ‘‘the wise” boasted, is exposed in 
all its insufficiency and worthlessness. Or wemay 
say with de Wette, “the wise were put to shame 
by being compelled to see the foolish obtaining 
that which was denied tothem.” In the latter 
ease, it is implied that ‘‘the wise” are conscious 
of the preference made, ‘‘and so were stung to 
reform” (Osiander). But this is not sustained by 
the context as the parallel expression “ bring to 
nought” shows. Thejubilant contrast proceeds. — 
and the weak things of this world, i. 6. the 
weak of every kind, bodily, mentally, politically. 
—God hath chosen to confound the 
things which are mighty.—The antithesis 
here is.introduced by the neuter: τὰ to χυρά, de- 
noting the category in general, although persons 
are meant. That any thing contemptuous was 
intended by this use of the neuter, is not proba- 
‘ble, since he just before spoke of a kindred class, 
‘the wise,” in the masculine. The “ confound- 
ing” is seen in the fact that “the weak things,” 
by virtue of the indwelling ‘‘power of God,” 
evince an energy and an overcoming power which 
is denied to the strong of this world.—In the 
third set of contrasts there appears an expansion 
of thought on the one side, with which there is 
nothing to correspond on the other.—And the 
base things of the world, and the de- 
spised things hath God chosen — the 
things which are as good as not, in order 
that He may bring to nought the things 
that are.—tlere we have the antithesis only to 
the last expression of the first series: ‘‘ the 
things that are” (τὰ ὅν τα). [This is readily 
accounted for, if the omission of the καί as sus- 
tained by the best authorities (see critical 
notes) be correct. In that case the τὰ μὴ ὄντα : the 
things which are not instead of being an addi- 
éion to the previous specifications, would stand 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





in opposition with them, as a sort of summary οὗν 
their meaning, and so be the main word re- 
quiring the offset on the other side]. Observe 
also the order of thought in the specifications, 
‘base things,” —a ye v7: of low origin. To this 
is added as a natural consequence: ‘despised 
things’— rad ἐξουϑενημένα: regarded as 
nothing. Then below both, as putting the mat- 
ter in its strongest possible aspect, there comes 
the τὰ μὴ ὄντα (to be distinguished from τὰ 
οὐκ ὄντα inasmuch as the μὴ is not an absolute, 
but a subjective negative. Winer, 2 59, 8): that 
which in the opinion of men is as good as non- 
existent. — In the antithetic τὰ ὄντα, some 
would insert a τί, making it read: things that are 
somewhat, of some importance. But this we are 
as little warranted in doing as in making τὰ μὴ 
ὄντ ατ-ετὰ μηϑὲν ὄντα : things which are of no ac- 
count, arenothing. What Paul here sets in contrast 
with the former are things which have being, are 
real, which are regarded as existing, and *‘ which 
continue to make themselves pass for sole reali- 
ties.” And for these things the verb “confound” 
would no longer suit. So we have another 
“bring to naught:” καταργήσῃ" make null, 
deprive of all validity. This is a much stronger 
expression, and it puts its ohject, relatively to 
the highest good to be enjoyed, out of existence.* 
The truth of the assertion has been well brought 
out by Neander: ‘In its scorned professors, the 
Gospel has in fact displayed a power of action 
and endurance, which far transcends the measure 
of the natural man. They alone never bowed to 
the despotism of the Roman Emperor. To them 
also the Gospel has imparted a steadfastness of 
conviction, which the proud philosophy of the 
Greeks never possessed; and a Christian mecha- 
nic, as Justin Martyr and Tertullian have af- 
firmed, was able to answer questions which the 
Greek philosopher asked in vain.” 





(# Whitby discovers an allusion in the above designations 
to the Jews and Gentiles. His observations are valuable. 
“The Jews looked upon themselves as the only évyeveis, — 
persons of true nobility, as being of the stock of Abraham. 
‘ Even the poorest Israelite,’ saith R. Akibah, ‘is to be looked 
upon as a gentleman, as being the son of Abraham, &c.;’ but 
the Gentiles they horribly despised, as the base people of the 
earth, not fit to be conversed with, they being styled in their 
law, ovxédvos: not a nation; λαὸς ὃ τεχθήσομενος, a people 
that shall be born, Ps. xxii. 31; ὃ κτιζόμενος, that should be 
created in the generation to come, Ps. cii. 19, and so yet had 
no being, Deut. xxxi. 21. οὐ Aads, not a people, Hos. i. 10; 
and it being said by the prophet, that all the Heathens are as 
nothing, and were accounted as nothing, Is. x1. 17, they still 
account them as such. Hence, Mordecai prays, Lord, give 
not thy sceptre τοῖς μὴ οὖσι, to them that are not, Esth. iv. 11; 
and Esdras. As for the people which also came of Adam, 
thou hast said they are nothing. And now, O Lord, these 
Heathens who have ever been reputed as nothing, have begun 
to be lords over us. 2 Esdras vi. 56-57. Thus Abraham is 
said to be the father of the Gentiles, before that God who 
calleth things which are not as tf they were, Rom. iv. 17; and 
Clemens Rom. saith of the Gentiles, “ He called us who were 
not, and would that of no being we should have a being.” 
So filthy are the Gentiles represented here by things that are 
not, things base, things accounied as nothing. See also 1 Cor. 
vi.4. And this is the ancient exposition of Origen, who, 
speaking of the rejection of the Jews, or the calling of the 
Gentiles, and God’s provoking the Jews to jealousy by them 
that were nota nation, he confirms this from these words: 
“@od hath chosen the base things of the world, and things 
which are not, that he might abolish the things which were 
before, that Israel, according to the flesh, might glory be- 
fore God.” Phileal c. p. 38. Now, however much we may feel 
constrained to take these designations in question in their 
more natural and broader acceptation as above, it is very 
evident that they were derived from the Theocratic usu 
loquendi.]} 


CHAP. I. 26-31. 





Ver. 29. The reason of the above mentioned 
peculiarity of God’s procedure in ‘‘calling” 
men.—that no flesh should boast in the 
presence of God.—y7 καυχήσεται πᾶσα 
σὰρξ, lit: that all flesh should not boast. A 
Hebraism. The negative belongs to the verb, and 
v=that all flesh should give up their boasting. 
he sense is: ‘‘no man should boast that he, out 
of his own endeavors, or position, or worth, had 
contributed any thing to the great achievements 
of the Gospel.” NeanpreR. It is a question 
whether we are to take the word “flesh” as 
simply denoting humanity in general, or are to 
associate with this the ideas of guilt and tran- 
sientness which are also conveyed by it. As a 
general rule the expression occurs in this way 
only when the one or the other of these ideas is 
implied in the context. ‘‘Flesh beautiful, yet 
frail” says Bengel.—[<‘ Here then we see that 
God by confounding the mighty, and the wise, 
and the great, does not design to elate with pride 
the weak, the illiterate, and the abject, but 
brings down all of them together to one level.” 
Carvin]. 

Ver. 30. The ground in the Divine economy 
on which this end is obtained and the glory of 
salvation secured to God alone.—But of him ye 
are in Christ Jesus.—A two-fold construction 
and exposition is here possible. Either the first 
five words may be taken as a sentence by itself, 
stating the fact of their origin in God: “Of him 
are ye.” The subsequent words, “in Christ 
Jesus,” would then assert the ground of their 
being from God—of their Divine Sonship, and 
this too in such a manner as to carry the empha- 
sis. Such a construction is supported by the 
fact that the important relative clause which 
follows is joined directly to it. Or the words 
‘ye are in Christ Jesus” may be taken together 
as denoting their being in fellowship with Christ, 
and then ‘‘of Him” assigns the cause of this 
fact,—shows how they came to be in Christ. The 
latter construction is not contrary to usage, and 
at least is not more forced than to suppose the 
word “are” to be employed as a pregnant con- 
struction for ‘have sprung’ or ‘been born,’ as 
Osiander does. We might compare with this 
Eph. ii. 8, «‘And that,” fo wit, being saved, “not 
of yourselves,” 
not saved of yourselves,’—stated in the positive 
form, ‘ye are saved of God,’ 7. 6. He is the author 
_ of your salvation. So here: He is the author 
of your being in Christ Jesus. This is sustained 
also by the “from God” (ἀ πὸ ϑεοῦ) in the 
relative clause which evidently refers back to 
“of Him” (ἐξ αὐτο Ὁ) andimparts to the thought 
additional emphasis* by repetition. In relation 
to the truth conveyed see Jno. vi. 44, 37, 65. The 
preference accordingly is to be given to the sec- 
ond construction. In this way, on the one hand, 
we preserve the Pauline expression ‘‘to be in 
Christ,” and avoid one which never elsewhere 
occurs—éx ϑεοῦ εἶναι: ‘to be from God.” 
By this explanation we would be compelled to 
refer ἐν κυρίῳ: ‘inthe Lord” (ver. 81), to God 
and not to Christ, contrary to Pauline usage. 
But this need present no difficulty, si‘.ce these 

2 ae 





[* A question might then arise: why ἐξ was (uot repeated 
and instead we have amd. See below]. j 





which is the same as ‘and ye are | 








48 





words in ver. 81 are not Paul’s, but a citation 
from the Old Testament. Who was made 
wisdom unto us from God, both righte- 
ousness and sanctification and redemp- 
tion.*—Here we have the rich treasure of bless- 
ings contained for us in Christ all laid open, re- 
vealing the largeness of our indebtedness to God, 
for what of real worth we have and are. “From 
God” is not to be connected with “wisdom” as 
indicating the source whence it came, but with 
“was made” as showing the author of the act. 
(ἐγενήϑη, a later Doric form for ἐγένετο, 
not passive). This is the order of thought pre- 
sented in the German [as well as in the English] 
version. The fact that Christ has been made to 
us ‘‘wisdom’”’- depends on God; and not only 
‘*wisdom,” but also the other particulars speci- 
fied. Observe, too, he here passes over into the 
first person plural, ‘unto us,” including therein 
himself as he frequently does elsewhere when 
specially moved by a sense of his fellowship with 
his readers in the salvation of Christ. The po- 
sition of ‘wisdom,’ coming in as it does before 
the words ‘“‘unto us from God,” and thus sepa- 
rated from the remaining predicates, is not to be 
explained on the ground that “wisdom” is the 
leading thought to which the others are subordi- 
nated. Such a construction is neither called for 
by the re xai, which only serves to connect 
‘righteousness’? and ‘sanctification” a little 
more closely, nor by the nature of the concep- 
tions expressed by the other terms, which des- 
ignate rather codrdinate aspects of the one great 
scheme of salvation entirely distinct from wis- 
dom, and therefore not capable of being included 
under it. Rather we may say that in consequence 
of the course of thought thus far pursued, the idea 
of “wisdom” pressed foremost upon his mind, 
and so came in where it did; or that he put the 
qualifying word common to the several members 
of the sentence right in among them as a word 
of connection (Osiander.) It is natural to look 
for some antithesis to what precedes in these 
four specifications, ‘‘ wisdom,” etc. But it can 
only be called a mistake in Bengel when he at- 
tempts to find a contrast, as in ‘‘wisdom” to 
‘the foolish things; so also in ‘“righteous- 
ness” to ‘‘the weak things,” in ‘‘sanctification ” 
to ‘‘the base things,” and in ‘‘redemption” to 
‘the despised things.” +—When it is affirmed 








[* We have here given the exact order of the Greek in or 
der to render the exposition more intelligible. ] 

+ We here insert the arguments in favor of the interpre- 
tation which Kling has simply set aside without refuting, 
and which seems worthy of consideration as best fitted to 
dispose of some of the difficulties under which his view la- 
bors—and also as fraught with valuable suggestions. This 
other interpretation has in its favor, that it takes in the 
thought as it flows upon the mind in the order of the words, 
“who is made unto us a wisdom from God—both righteous- 
ness and sanctification and redemption.” In a collocation 
of words so peculiar, it were natural to take the last three 
terms as an after thought exegetical of the main one— 
and such an addition was needed. Wisdom was what Paul 
had been disparaging throughout this section. But it was 
the wisdom of man. Now he glories in Christ as having been 
made unto us wisdom. It was necessary theretore to differ- 
ence this from what he had been condemning. So he adds 
ἀπό Ocov—not ἐξ, as in the previous clause where he 
wishes to express the cause of an act; but ἀπό: from denos 
ting derivation, showing whence this wisdom came. It is uv 
objection to this that the article τή is not mentioned before 
ἀπό, since the omission is quite in Paul’s style. Eph. iii. 18, 
(See Alf.: also 15). Then to characterize this wisdom, to ex- 
hibit its distinguishing peculiarities as practical and suited 


40 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





that ‘Christ was made to us wisdom,” by this we 
are to understand that in Him, in His person, the 
fulness of which was unfolded in His history, the 
mystery of the Divine plan of salvation has been 
disclosed, and with this an insight been afforded 
us into the dispensations and judgments of God, 
and we are enabled to recognize and lay hold 
upon that which shall conduct us to the goal of 
our noblest longings (comp. ii. 7 ff.; Col. i. 9 ff; 
26 ff.; iii. 2; iii, 10; Phil. i. 9 ff; Eph. v. 8 ff. 
etc.). As closely related ideas, ‘‘righeousness ” 
and ‘‘sanctification’”’ are so joined as to form a 
distinct whole: δικαιοσύνη τε καὶ aye 
ασμός. The first reminds us of 2 Cor. v. 21— 
‘that we might be made the righteousness of 
God in him;” and of Jer. xxiii. 5—‘*The Lord 
our righteousness;”’ and also of the saying of 
Christ himself in Matth. iii. 15, as well as of 
Acts xiii. 38; Is. 1111. 11; Gal. ii. 16, 17; Rom. 
i. 17; iii. 21 ff. In the language of Holy Writ 
righteousness denotes that conduct which com- 
ports with the law of God or the disposition 
suitable to it. This existed in Christ in absolute 
perfection; and it existed in Him as the second 
Adam (xy. 4, 7), the son of man, the head repre- 
senting the whole body, and in behalf of the en- 
tire sinful race, whose obligations to the law He 
had fulfilled by a life of perfect obedience, and 
whose debt to justice He has cancelled by sub- 
miting to the penalty threatened upon sin in a 
voluntary sacrifice of Himself even unto death, 
thereby complying with the behests of the Father 
and revealing His holy and compassionate love 
towards the fallen. In this way has He become 
righteousness for us, that we may be counted 
righteous before God and enter into the posses- 
sion of the rights and privileges which belong to 
this state of righteousness—that is, be adopted 
into the Divine family. This, regarded as an act 
of God, is expressed by the terms δικαιοῦν 
δικαίωσις : to justify, justification; and the par- 
don of sin, as the negative side of justifica- 
tion, includes also, for its corresponding positive 
side, God’s cordial acceptance of us as pleasing 
in His sight. But in this judicial portion of 
Christ’s redeeming work there lies also, at the 
same time, an element of moral change—of sanc- 
tification (ἃ γεα ς μό ς), and the intimate connec- 
tion between these two things is expressed by the 
τε καί. (‘In this conjunction there is implied 
at once distinction and equality, an intimation 
of similarity, as though the one were consequent 
upon the other.” Ostanper. In order that the 





= 


for man’s deepest deeds, instead of being merely speculative, 
he subjoins the three great points it contemplated. And 
here is where wisdom of the Gospel far surpasses that of sec- 
ular philosophy. It gives him in Christ pardon, holiness, 
triumphant deliverance from woe to glory. Here then we 
find 1, an adequate reason for the order of the words; 2, not 
a repetition but a distinct thought in ἀπὸ θεοῦ, and so a rea- 
son for the change of preposition: 3, not a digression from 
the main course of thought as must be supposed in the other 
interpretation, which Stanley admits, but a glorious consum- 
mation of it, displaying the infinite superiority of the wisdom 
from God over all human wisdom; 4, an epexegesis quite in 
the manner of Panl. Rom.i.12. Since writing the above I 
see that the view above given is adopted, though not argued 
out, by Butler in his sermons on our text. It is substan- 
tiated also by the Syriac, Vul., and Rheims versions. Nean- 
der’s testimony may be added; “In these last three concep- 
tions (righteousness, sanctification and redemption), there 
are presented to us the practical contents of the wisdom 
(from God), by which it is distinguished from the wisdom 
ef this world.’’} 


relation to God, in which our justification places 

us, may be subjectively sustained, so that we 

may say ‘“‘the judgment of God is according te 
truth,” there must be an inward connection be 

tween the Head and the members who partici- 
pated in the righteousness of their Head; This 
connection is effected by the love of Christ 
awakening faith in us. This love at once de- 
stroys in the subject of it all disposition to live 

for himself, as the moving spring of his exist- 
ence, all ambitious aspiring, and transports him 

into a state of mind that leads him to live and 

to become every thing in Christ alone. And 

this is faith, humble, earnest faith, that works in 4 
us repentance as its result. In this emancipa- 

tion of the individual from the thraldom of sel- 
fishness (an emancipation which is at the same 

time a deliverance from-every thing to which 
selfishness binds us, even the idols of flesh and 
sense, and the world), and in this union to Christ 

as the sole worthy and worth-giving Saviour, 

lies the germ of our ‘“ sanctification.” By this 

we understand becoming godly-minded—the 
consecration of our whole life in all its elements 

unto God—the offering up of self unto the Most 
High, so that all labor becomes a Divine service, 

the springs of which are joy in the Lord and the 
witness of the Spirit to our adoption and final 
salvation, This ἁγεασμός: holiness, may 

be regarded either as progressive—sanctifica- 

tion, or as a fixed quality—sanctity. The latt 
is the prevailing usage in the New Testame 
(Rom. vi. 19-22; 1 Thess. iv. ὃ, 4, 7; 1 Tim. 
15; Heb. xii. 14 ete.). It is to be so taken he 
In reference to the thing itself see Jno. xvii. 19 
and the juxtaposition of “ye are justified” ar 
ἐγ are sanctified” in 1 Cor. vi. 11. But wh 
all are agreed as to the meaning of these fore 
ing terms as a whole, it is not so in regard 
the last one, ‘and redemption” (ἀπολύτ 
σις). Are we (with Meyer) to take this as ἃ 
noting the work of Christ through which our sal 
tion is achieved (as in Rom. iii. 24; Eph. i. 7), 
that it is for us an object of faith? or (accordit 
to the Catholic expositors) as our final deli 
ance from death and all the evils and temptati 
of sin (asin Rom. viii. 23; Eph. i. 14), and 
as an object of hope? The latter interpretat 
corresponds better with the position of the wo 
since it will hardly do, after having mentio 
‘righteousness and sanctification,” to go b 
again to the negative idea of deliverance fr 
guilt, which is already involved in the ter 
righteousness. On the other hand, its posit 
renders the addition of any explanatory ter 
like that found in Rom. viii. 23; Eph. i. 14; iv. 
30, unnecessary. Comp. for a fuller development 
of the thought Rom. viii. 10, 11, and 21-24, . 
—Here then is the final stage of our salvation a 
deliverance from the bondage of corruption unto 
the glorious liberty of the sons of God. That in 
this, as well as in the foregoing instances, Christ 
exhibits himself as the ‘‘ power of God” victori- 
ous over the power of sin and its terrible conse- 
quence, death, is a proximate thought, so that 
here again those two chief predicates, ‘“‘ wisdom 
and pover,” recur to view, only the second with 
greater drominence. But in the case of ‘‘sanc- 
tification,’ as well as of ‘‘redemption,” it is im- 
plied that Christ is in Himself what He has be - 





























‘ 
de an 


: CHAP. I. 26-31, 
a ΄’ῤῤῤ΄ῤ᾿᾿᾿ῤῤ΄᾿᾿ὔ 


come for us; that He in all His life and walk was 
entirely severed from all fellowship with sin and 
wholly consecrated to God, 7. 6. holy, and as such 
was the principle of our sanctification; that He 
arose victorious from the grave and the whole 
realm of sin, and at once ascended up on high, 
exalted over all, and as such carries in Himself 
the power by which our redemption is to be 
achieved. (Comp. xv. 26, 55; Eph. ii. 6). 

Ver. 31. The final cause of the peculiar me- 
thod of God’s call and the plan of His salvation 
by the free gift of an all-sufficient Saviour.— 
In order that, according as it is written, 
he that boasteth, in the Lord let him 
boast.—Here is where the argument conducts 
us. There must be a boasting, a glorying; not, 
however, in oneself before God, but in God as 
the author of all our advantages and blessings. 
And this boasting is the expression of a lofty 
emotion of joy and confidence. If by the term 
“Lord” Christ were meant, it should be ex- 
plained as an exultation in His fellowship, in 
possessing a share in His salvation. But the re- 
lation to ver. 29 points rather to God, the origi- 
nal source of all salvation. And such an appli- 
cation would not militate against Paul’s usage, 
because, as has already been remarked, the pas- 
sage is a citation from the Old Testament (Jer. 
ix. 23), particular prominence being given to 
the chief thought by holding fast to the original 
form. Hence the anacoluthon, ἵνα---καυχάσϑω, 
instead of καυχᾶται. If anything were to be sup- 
plied it would be γένηται. For a similar case see 
Rom. xv. 3. 


DOGMATICAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. God’s thoughts and ways entirely unlike those 
of the natural man.—What is great and glorious 
in the sight of men, God sets at naught. What 
men slight as mean and contemptible, God prizes, 
or makes it precious. Man’s propensity is to 
exalt himself, and hold in honor whatever is the 
product of his own powers and bears the mark 
of mental or physical superiority, or oan be 
used to personal advantage, or is of noble origin, 
while he treats all that is crude and powerless 
and vulgar, just as if it had no existence. God, 
on the other hand, in His work of redeeming vain 
man, especially at its very commencement, pro- 
ceeds on methods quite the reverse. Here we 
see the Son of the Highest, whois inthe form of 
God, the Fulness of Divine life‘and wisdom and 
power, and, as the perfect image of the Father, 
is infinitely exalted above the most eminent of 
created beings, yea, is the very substance and 
vital principle of all the excellence and power 
which these beings possess—we see Him empty- 
ing Himself of His glory, entering into a state 
of creaturely dependence, assuming the form of 
a servant, coming into association with a sinful 
race although Himself sinless, bearing in holy 
sympathy alltheir burdens and trials on His own 
heart, and sharing in their condemnation and 
suffering and death, even to the ignoriinious 
death of the cross. Thus, at the very s.art, did 
Divine Power and Wisdom and Holines); exhibit 
themselves as weakness, foolishness/and sin; 
Life and Light, as death and darkne/s; Riches 
inexhaustible, as deepest poverty; thi: All in All, 








47 


as nothing; Essential Being, as not being. Thus 
in His fundamental act did God confront and 
confound the vain conceit of men who aspired te 
resemble Him in power, wisdom and blessednegs, 
And this initial procedure has shaped the whole 
method of salvation ordained in the Gospel. As 
the condition of pardon and acceptance God re- 
quires of men the absolute renunciation of their 
own wisdom, power and sufficiency, and a dispo- 
sition to ascribe all honor and glory unto God, 
who has thus manifested Himself to them in 
Christ, and to regard His workmanship in them 
as alone possessing worth. But since this re- 
quirement is exceedingly difficult for such as 
have distinction in this world, it happens that. 
among the saved there are found not many wise, 
mighty and noble; but the Divine calling proves 
effectual rather in the sphere of the rude, the 
weak, the ignoble and the lowly, inasmuch as it 
is among these that the disposition to accept sal- 
vation exists in the highest degree or is most 
readily awakened. Thus it cometh to pass that 
while the wise and the noble and the mighty of 
earth are passed by and deemed unfit for hea- 
venly honors, the foolish are lifted up into the 
light of Divine wisdom, the weak are clothed 
with Divine power, the ignoble are invested with 
the highest nobility, those who are as if they 
were not, attain consideration as the only real 
personages, and by the contrast the pomp and 
pride of earth are put to shame. The reason of 
this is that there may be no boasting before God. 
To this there is the opposite. 

2. Unto God the Lord be all glory—He is 
the author of all benefits which come to us 
through Christ, and as He is the author so is 
He their final cause. Of Him and to Him are all 
things. 

And these benefits appertain to all the aspects 
and relations of man’s being and life as con- 
nected with God and His kingdom, viz. the in- 
tellectual, the legal, the moral and the physical. 
First, Wisdom. This in its highest form is the 
knowledge of God, and such a knowledge we 
have imparted in the revelation of His Gospel— 
a knowledge of His character, His works and 
ways, of the economy of His kingdom in its: pre- 
paration, establishment, spread and final con- 
summation, by means of which the thoughtful 
spirit may be led to choose the way of life, and 
to advance from the first appropriation of salva- 
tion in faith on to its full fruition in glory. Of 
this wisdom Christ is made to us the substance 
and the illuminating principle. The second 15 
Righteousness, 7. e., restoration of fellowship with 
God by the satisfaction of all the law’s demand, 
and the cancelling of all obligations incurred, so 
that the sinner can on this ground, be accounted 
righteous in the sight of God, and be reinstated 
in his forfeited rights, and have free access to 
the Father as one of His family. This righte- 
ousness Christ has been made unto us by His 
having fulfilled all the claims of the law, both in 
doing and in suffering, both by yielding a per- 
fect obedience and by assuming the curse out of 
His free, infinite love, so that we, being found 
in Him, may be made partakers of His merits. 
The third, inseparably connected with the pre- 
ceding, is the Sanctification of human life in all ita 
inward and outward movements so far as they 


48 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


----- .τττ τττ----------Ὁ----ς-ς-.-.,ο-.---ς-ρ---.--------ῥ-ὔ-------------------ς----------..--- Ow 


are determined by man’s own will. This is 
effected by the shedding abroad of the love of 
God in the heart through the indwelling Spirit, 
who, consequent upon the work of Christ, comes 
to appropriate to us His righteousness and to as- 
sure us of his pardoning grace. And when, not- 
withstanding all past sins, we become thoroughly 
conscious of this love to us, there is awakened in 
our souls a love in return which shows itself 
in perfect confidence and in entire devotion 
to God, and in the utter renunciation of all sel- 
fish and worldly affections. And this is holiness. 
But this holiness perfects itself gradually, in the 
daily exercise of repentance and faith, and love 
more and more takes possession of the whole life 
to the complete regulation of all our faculties 
and relations, so far as they can be determined 
by it. And this Christ is made, unto us by vir- 
tue of His holiness passing over into our hearts 
through the Holy Ghost, whom He hath given 
unto us, and who transforms us into a likeness 
to His all-perfect character. Finally, Redemption. 
—tThis is the destruction of all our enemies, even 
to the last, which is death, so that not only is the 
spirit life because of righteousness, but God, who 
hath raised from the dead the Lord Jesus Christ, 
will quicken our mortal bodies through the Spirit 
that dwelleth in us. Thus is man, in respect to 
his entire organism, delivered from the bondage 
of corruption, and introduced into the glorious 
liberty of the children of God. And all this is 
done through the power and after the type of 
Christ, who, Himself victor over death, has be- 
come the principle of life eternal for all who be- 
lieve in Him. As they die with Him, so also will 
they reign with Him. In this that profound say- 
ing is fulfilled, that corporeity is the end of the 
ways of God; in other words, that the deliver- 
ance of our whole organization from the ban of 
death, and our introduction into the fulness and 
power of an indestructible life is the consumma- 
tion of God’s work of restoring fallen man; a 
work which was begun in his deliverance from the 
condemnation of sin. Short and good, Olearius: 
Christus est sapientia in verbo, quoad doctrinam, jus- 
tibia in merito, quoad fidem; sanctificatio in spiritu, 
quoad vitam ; redemptio in novissimo adventu, quoad 
salutem xternam. 

3. [The efficiency of faith in the matter of salva- 
tion.—This consists not in any virtue or meritori- 
ousness of the act itself but in the fulness of bles- 
sings contained in the Being whom it appropriates 
or to whom it unites us. It enlightens because 
it lets in the light of Christ’s wisdom; it justifies 
because it appropriates the righteousness of 
Christ; it sanctifies because it puts us into 
fellowship with Christ’s holy life, and it proves 
our victory over death and the grave by associa- 





ting us with Him who, as the Captain of our 


salvation, has proved himself the mighty con- 
queror. Thus while the wisdom and the power 
of this world are limited by the weakness and 
imperfection of human faculties, faith proves its 
superiority over both by taking to itself the ful- 
ness of Him who filleth all in all. ] 

4. [Christ cannot be divided in the benefits 
accruing from Him. We cannot have Him for 
our wisdom or for our righteousness without at 
the same time having Him for our sanctification 
and our redemption. The lack of any one of 





these benefits proves the absence of them all. 
Christ is a perfect whole, and His work a perfect 
whole, and to be accepted at all He must be 
accepted as a whole. | 

5. [The surpassing excellence of God’s method 
of salvation is seen in the fact that he presents 
to us not a dead system of doctrines nor 
lifeless instrumentalities to be acquired and im- 
proved by us, but a living agency, a person, 
infinite, ever-present, ever-active, all-wise, all- 
powerful, all-good, who acts upon us while we 
act on Him, and saves us by an efficiency of his 
own. | 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


1. [The method of preaching the Gospel must 
be adapted to the nature of the Divine calling.— 
1. As to the subjects thereof. The preaching 
should be of such a kind, and be set forth in such 
a manner, as to reach the poor, the illiterate and 
the weak. One sign that the kingdom of God 
has come is that the poor have the Gospel 
preached unto them. As it was in the beginning 
somustit still be. God’s calling has not changed 
its nature. But in thus suiting the Gospel to 
the humble, we are not to set aside the noble and 
learned as though excluded from salvation. At 
the manger in Bethlehem the worship of the 
shepherds was followed by the worship of the 
wise men from the Hast; among the disciples 
there was a Joseph of Arimathea; the vacancy 
in the Apostleship made by the fall of Judas was 
filled by a Paul; among the converts at Corinth 
was Erastus the chamberlain and the wealthy 
Gaius. 2. Asto the ends it has in view, viz: 
the humbling of man’s pride and the promoting 
of God’s glory.—The aim at such an end must 
be seen in the style and manner of the preacher 
himself and in the effects which he seeks to pro- 
duce. 38. As to its contents.—This must be 
Christ in all His fulness and in His manifold ad- 
aptations to the wants of the sinner; Christ Him- 
self, not a system of doctrines, nor a code of 
precepts, but the living person. ] 

2. The reason why not many wise are called. 
1. Not because God puts contempt on human 
wisdom, onrank or fortune, or upon man’s natural 
faculties and powers, for these are His gifts and 
were designed for good, 2, but on account of 
men’s guilt. They abuse these gifts into an 
oceasion for withdrawing themselves from the 
grace of God, and setting up for themselves to the 
darkening of their own understandings and the 
ruin of all their own interests through their 
weakness and insufficiency. SpeneR in STARKE. 

3. Three classes of persons, the wise, the 
strong and the noble, are the special foes of God’s 
kingdom, partly because they think that God’s 
grace detracts from their power and consequence, 
and partly because they imagine themselves to 
be already in a blessed condition (John ix. 89- 
41). SrarKe. 

4. The fact that a majority of its professors 
at firs: were of humble rank redounds to the honor 
of Christianity. From this it is seen: 1. That it 
esteems all men alike.. 2. That it owes its rise 
and spre.d not to human might and art, but to 
God. 8..That it requires not learning but an 
honest he: rt that is anxious for its own salvation. 


‘ 


— “5. 


CHAP. II. 1-5. 49 





—A miserable hull often conceals a precious 
kernel. HEUBNER. 

5. The obligations which spring from these truths. 
—The poor and needy owe Christianity their 
profoundest gratitude for being so honored by 
it. [At the same time they must be careful not 
to arrogate any superiority in the sight of 
God over those who are above them in learning 
or birth or ability. Pride in ignorance and 
meanness is no less abominable in the sight of 
God than pride in greatness, wealth and learn- 
ing.] On the contrary, the rich and the noble 
have occasion to humble themselves. Christi- 
anity owes them nothing, and they should be 
mindful of the danger of being beguiled 
from it. 

6. The proud and self-sufficient must be hum- 
bled.—The Saviour did not become the Son of 
David until the princely glory of David’s house 
had departed and his descendants had come to 
the saw-horse. This was to show that the lofti- 
ness of this world must be brought low, if it 
would enter the kingdom of God. [The heights 
of earthly promotion and glory lift us no whit 
nearer Heaven.—lIt is easier to step there from 
the lowly vale of humiliation and sorrow.] God’s 
kingdom is a cross-kingdom. GossNER. 

7. Cheer for the lowly.—What the world rejects 
that God lifts up and transforms into a sanctuary. 
Art thou small and despicable in the sight of 
men, rejoice at it and consider that God looks 
down especially upon thee (Ps. cxiii. 6-8 and 
€xxxviil. 6). 

8. Instruction for the high.—To God belongs all 
the glory. If then God is to display his power 
in thee and make something out of thee, thou 
must consent to become asnothing. Everything 
in Christianity turns upon this one quality of 
humility. The blessedness of the children of 
God is that they possess nothing, the glory of 
which does not belong to God. 

9. What incomparable riches in Christ! — Be- 
lievest thouin Him? Then thou possessest Him. 
Let earth’s trifles pass. Thou hast Christ, and 
with Him thou hast all things.—He is thine in 
all his offices.—As a Prophet, he is our wisdom; 
as High-Priest, he is our righteousness; as King, 
he is our sanctification; and in all three offices, 
he is our complete redemption. HeEpiEecer. 

10. J.Spencer. Ver. 21. Thesuperiority of Chris- 
tianity over human science, on the subject of religion. 
I. Demonstrated as to a. a future state; ὁ. Hu- 
man duty; 6. The character of God; ὦ. The par- 
don of the sinners. II. Application; a. Guard 
against a so-called philosophical style of reason- 
ing; ὃ. Cling to the great distinctive doctrines 
of the Gospel; ὁ. Prize the pure Gospel; d. 


Heedlessness of sinners, strange. J. Barrow. 
ver. 23. The doctrine of the Gospel—the doctrine 
of the cross. 1. As a suffering—in appearance 
criminal. 2. As most bitter and painful. 3. As 
most ignominious and shameful. 4. As agree- 
able and advantageous to the intents of the 
passion. 5. As completory of ancient significa- 
tions and predictions. 6. As apt to excite devo- 
tion, and enforce the practice of duty. H. 
BusHNELL. ver. 28. The power of God in self- 
sacrifice. I. God is morally passible; a part of 
His glory is to be compassionate. 11. This com- 
passion exhibited in Christ’s passion on the cross.» 
III. The power of it as seen in the effect it has 
to subdue enmity. It conquers evil by enduring 
evil.—C. H. Spurceon. Vv. 23 and 24. Christ 


crucified. I. The Gospel rejected. II. The Gos- 
pel accepted. III. The Gospel admired. Ano- 
Nymous. Vv. 26-29. 716 Christian calling. I. 


Its nature; a. Not many mighty, wise and noble; 
but ὁ. The foolish, the weak, the base, are 
called. II. The reason: a. Not that God is un- 
willing that the great, and wise, and noble should 
be saved; but ὁ. Because the foolish, the weak, 
the base, are more ready to feel their need and 
accept grace; and 6. that the glory of God may 
be the more signalized. II. In its bearings; a, 
Shows us the periious position of the mighty, 
and noble, and wise; they are in danger of being 
passed by and confounded; ὁ. Teaches us not to 
disparage the foolish, the weak and the base; 6, 
The foolish, the weak and tiie base are not to be 
proud against the opposite class, as though any 
better in God’s sight; d. The true preparation 
for God’s kingdom is an entire emptying of self; 
e. The purport of the calling, the glory of God.— 
Jon. Epwarps. Vv. 29-31. God glorified in man’s 
dependence. I. This dependence absolute and 
universal; a. As they have all their good of God; 
a. of his grace; β. of his power; ὁ. As they have 
all through God; 6. As they have all ἐπ God both 
their objective good and their subjective good. 
11. God is glorified in it. a. In that it affords 
greater occasion and obligation to take notice of 
and acknowledge God’s perfections and all-suffi- 
ciency; 5. In that it is hereby demonstrated 
how great God’s glory is as compared with. the 
creature’s. III. Use of the doctrine; a. It 
shows us God’s marvellous wisdom. in the work 
of redemption; 4. Those systems of doctrine, 
that are opposed to this absolute and universal 
dependence on God, do derogate from God’s 
glory, and so thwart the design of the contrivance 
for our redemption; c. We learn the efficiency, 
of faith; d. Our duty is to. exalt God above, and 
ascribe to Him all the glory of redemption. A. 
Burier. ver. 30. Christ the source of all blessings. 


C. As Illustrated by the Apostle’s Example. 
Carrer II. 1-5. 


1. And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of 


2 wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony! of God. 


For I determined not to know? 


3 any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in 
7 


δ0 THE FIRST EPISTLE ΤῸ THE CORINTHIANS. 


Se eens tae ramet YOON ye 
4 weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was 

not with enticing words of man’s [om. man’s*] wisdom,but in demonstration of the 
5 Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in 


the power of God. 


1 Ver. 1.—Instead of μαρτύριον, others, according to good and ancient authorities [A.C. Cod. Sin. Syr.], read μυστήριον, 
But it is more probable that this arose from a gloss suited to ver. 7, than that μαρτύριον could have crept in here from i. 63 
at the same time Only a few authorities read μαρτύριον τοῦ χριστοῦ. 

2 Ver. 2.—The received τοῦ εἰδέναι re is not well authenticated, and the order τὶ εἰδέναι is confirmed by B.C. Ὁ. E. A. and 


many other decisive authorities. 
E. and by Griesbach, Scholz., Lach., Alf., Meyer. 
pretation: to know what is in you.’”’] 


(Wordsworth says: “ri, which is emphatic, is rightly placed before εἰδέναι by B.C. ἢ 
Indeed εἰδέναι τί ἐν ὑμῖν Would have been liable to an inconyenient inter 


8 Ver. 4.—The received av@pwrivns has the balance of authorities against it [and is omitted by Griesb., Scholz. Lach. 
Tisch., Meyer.) Other variations in this ver. (e.g.) πιθανοῖς for πειθοῖς, etc., can hardly be regarded as any thing more than 


conjectures of an older or a later date, (See below.) 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


The connection.—Paul here affirms his own 
conduct to have been in strict accordance with 
the nature of the Divine calling. [His views 
were sustained by his practice and at the same 
time justified that practice.] <‘‘As the Lord 
chose no one among you on account of his wisdom, 
s0 I did not come to you with wisdom.”—Buraer. 

Ver. 1. And I.—x¢yw: “I also.” So God 
has dealt with you, and I have conformed to his 
method. [Or: ‘I also, like all true Christian 
preachers.”—pz Werte. Or: ‘I accordingly,” 
consistently with the revealed purpose of God just 
mentioned.”—Hopaz.] The connection with the 
preceding paragraph is close and direct, though 
aremoter reference to i. 17, 23 is not thereby 
excluded.—on coming to you, brethren, 
came not.—He has in view here his first long 
residence at Corinth, although a second shorter 
visit had been paid them just before writing this 
Epistle. The repetition ‘‘coming,” ‘I came,” 
is not foreign to classic usage, nor is it mere 
tautology. The former expresses the fact of his 
appearing among them [or the occasion of which 
he was about to speak,] while the second with 
its qualifying adjuncts states the way and mode 
of his appearance.—with excellency of 
speech and of wisdom.—[‘ As speech and 
wisdom (λόγος and σοφία) are here distinguished, 
the former probably refers to the manner or 
form, and the latter to the matter of his preach- 
ing. It was neither as a rhetorician nor as a 
philosopher that he appeared before them.”— 
Hopvae. In i. 17 what he disavowed was wis- 
dom of speech (σοφίᾳ λόγου), the emphasis being on 
‘“‘wisdom.” Here, the two are distinguished as 
separate elements, and the idea of rhetoric is 
added to that of philosophy.] This clause some 
make the sole adjunct to “I came,” leaving the 
rest of the sentence distinct, as adducing the 
proof of his appearing as he did, g. d., “1 came 
to you thus and so, inasmuch as I proclaimed,’ 
etc. [‘*This mode is generally preferred not only 
because of the position of the words, but also 
because of the sense.”—Hopaer; and so Alford, 
Stanley and others.] But the whole clause is to 
be taken together, and the adjunct before us to 
be connected with—proclaiming to you the 
testimony of God.—The sense is ‘I did not 
come preaching with highly wrought eloquence 
and philosophic subtilities.’ To take the present 
participle here in a future sense is neither neces- 
sary nor suitable, since he is here speaking not 


of intention but simply of his mode of conduct. 
The matter of his preaching is ‘the testimony 
of God.” This is essentially the same as ‘the 
testimony of Christ,” i. 6, and what was there 
said holds good also here. It is the testimony 
which God bears concerning Christ (1 Jno. v. 9), 
or the revelation of his plan of salvation which 
He makes out of His own consciousness, origin- 
ally through Christ, and then through the Apos- 
tles. This is what it is incumbent on the servant 
of God simply to proclaim. In this work there 
is no need of rhetorical ornament and philo- 
sophic art. The very object of the proclamation 
itself precludes the applicability of eloquence and 
wisdom. (Comp. Osi.) [‘‘The Gospel is in its 
essence not a theory, or an abstraction, or ἃ 
comment, or an image of the fancy, but it is 
history, and indeed, Divine history. The preach- 
ing of the Gospel is therefore a proclamation of 
the doings of God, and especially of that one 
great act of love, viz., the sending of His own 
Son to die for the sins of the world. This may 
become a matter for theory and science in the 
bosom of the Church after faith in it has become 
established, but even then it is only as a develop- 
ment from faith. Science can never beget faith. 
Faith comes only through the regenerating power 
of God’s Spirit, who reveals Himself efficiently 
and in the most direct manner through the pro- 
clamation of the Gospel story.” OLSHAUSEN. | 
Ver. 2. His conduct in the particular above- 
mentioned shown to be deliberate—the result of 
a settled purpose. For—confirmatory—I did 


not determine.—[The negative particle, by. 


its position here, is more naturally connected 
with the main verb. So Alf., who interprets: 
“the only thing that I made it definitely my 
business to know, was;’’ and Meyer says that the 
common connection of the “not” with ‘any 


thing” (τι), as in our E, V., is contrary to the ~ 


phraseology. But Stanley translates: ‘I deter- 
mined to know nothing,” making οὐκ ἔκρινα like 
od onut. The difference of import is somewhat. 
In the one case, Paul tells us how far his mind 
was made up, that his determination did not go 
beyond one point; in the other case, his deter- 
mination was a positive one, covering the whole 
ground and exciuding from that all but one 
thing.] κρίνειν with the inf.—to conclude upon, 
resolved, decide, as in 2 Cor. ii. 1; 1 Rom. xiv. 
13.—to know any thing among you ex- 
cept Jesus Christ and him crucified—~. 6. 
to mingle any other sort of knowledge with the 
preaching of Christ. His one sole aim was to 
portray before their eyes this one person, and 


CHAP. II. 1-5. 
eS 


that too in His deepest humiliation, as He had 
suffered for them the shameful death of the 
cross. [So far from seeking to conceal his ig- 
hominy, so offensive to the worldly spirit, he 
would make it prominent and glory init.] Hence 
it was that he would not indulge in any rhetori- 
cal or dialectic arts, in any high-flown discourse 
or philosophic argumentation. In this way cer- 
tainly he mighce fail to attract the educated 
classes, so called, but he would be the better 
able to bring to light men’s actual’ religious needs 
and satisfaction. And this, with him, was the 
great point, for which he was willing to renounce 
every attainment in which he excelled, for he 
knew that those who wilfully neglected the reve- 
lation he brought could be gained by no reason- 
ings from the light of nature. (See Bengel in 
loco.) [Furthermore, it must be observed, that 
it would be to mistake entirely the drift of the 
Apostle’s discourse, were we to take the name of 
Christ here, according to the fashion of many 
divines, as put by metonymy for the whole sys- 
tem of divinity, or for the doctrine of the Atone- 
ment. The purpose of Paul here is to avoid 
theorizing of all kinds, and to adhere rigidly to 
Christianity in its most concrete form as seen in 
the person and work of its founder. In his view, 
preaching was to act the part of a herald, to 
proclaim, not opinions, but the facts and messages 
as intrusted to him, and to let them speak for 
themselves. Hence we are here to take his lan- 
guage most literally. What he resolved on pro- 
claiming to the Corinthians was Christ in His 
person and work, as the living revelation of the 
Father, as the Truth and the Life, as the One 
in whom were hid all the treasures of wisdom 
and knowledge, as the source of all salvation 
and blessing, whom to believe in, love and serve 
was life eternal. His Gospel was not theory or 
science, but history, and the glory of this history 
is, to use the words of Olshausen, that «it 
lives and repeats itself in the Church as a whole 
and in every member of the Church. It there- 
fore never grows old any more than God himself 
can become antiquated; and it maintains itself 
to this day in all that fulness of power which it 
manifested in the first establishment of the 
Church.” —‘“‘To know any thing.’ There is a 
force in the use of the word ‘‘know,”’ instead of 
“preach,” or ‘‘teach,’’ which is not to be over- 
looked. Itshows that his determination covered 
not only the range of his words and acts but also 
of his thoughts. He meant that Christ should 
fill his consciousness. }. 

Ver. 3. ‘‘Describes the preacher, as the for- 
mer verse did his theme.” Bengel.—And I 
was with you, ἐγενόμην πρὸς ὑμᾶς. This 
might be rendered: I came to you, as 2 Jno. 
xii. (according to the better reading). But Paul 
is here speaking not of his coming, but of his 
residence among them (ver. 4). In like manner 
yevéotat πρός occurs also in xvi. 10. (πρός : be- 
fore, in presence of, xvi. 6,7; Gal. i. 18; Jno. 
i. 1.) How he was with them he proceeds to 
state in three substantives. a. in weakness. 
Since he is here speaking of his personal bearing, 
we are not to understand by this any physical 
infirmity, such as weak organs, or feeble chest, 
or ungainliness of form [as Stanley]; nor yet any 
sickness, or feebleness, bringing with it depres- 











51 





sion of spirits [as Riickert and Stier], though this 
would be more plausible; and, least of all, any 
thing happening from without, like persecutions, 
and sufferings inflicted by others [as Chrysos- 
tom], which would be inconsistent with the use 
of the singular number. In view of the expres- 
sions of Paul himself (2 Cor. x. 1, 10; xii. 10; 
iv. 7-12) it were better to refer this to inward 
weakness, but not so much to any sense of defect 
in science and education (so de Wette, Osi.), as 
to a feeling of utter inadequacy for the greatness 
of the work and for the resistance he would have 
to encounter (see Acts xviii. 9, ff.). [Bengel 
says: ‘‘opposed to power (ver. 4). We must not 
suppose that the Apostles were always in an 
agreeable frame of mind or quite free from per- 
turbations.] ὁ. in fear and c. in great trem- 
bling.—Terms expressive of great timidity as 
contrasted with a bold and confident demeanor 
maintained by the overweening consciousness 
of his own abilities, ‘‘such as appeared in the 
eyes of ancient Paganism to be the highest 
morality.”” Neanper. It has been justly ob- 
served that such anxiety, arising from a sense 
of insufficiency for the work on hand, is a marked 
characteristic of the most distinguished servants 
of God (see Osiander). The interpretation of 
Olshausen and others is less consistent with the 
idea expressed in the foregoing term (‘‘in weak- 
ness.”) They understand Paul as intimating 8, 
modest fear lest he shoald corrupt the Divine 
truth with a mixture of human elements, and 
failin the proper discharge of his duty. The 
sense of the phrase, ‘in fear and trembling,” 
which is a proverbial one (Gen. ix. 2; Ex. xv. 
16; Is. xix. 16) is determined by the connection. 
Elsewhere, as in Eph. vi. 5; 2 Cor. vii. 15, it 
denotes: sollicita reverentia; or, as Bengel: “A 
fear which abounds so as to effect even the body 
in its gestures and movements.” 


Ver. 4. Describes the mode of preaching. — 
And my speech and my preaching.—The 
‘‘and”’ in ver. 8 and the ‘‘and” in ver. 4 are 
not so related as to be rendered: ‘‘As well I my- 
self—as also my speech.” But the first of these 
conjunctions simply joins ver. 3 to the preceding, 
and the second, ver. 4 to ver. 8, putting the 
matters stated in harmonious connection. On 
account of the repetition of ‘‘my,” we are not 
at liberty to take the two words here as identi- 
cal, nor yet are they so related as to indicate the 
first the form and the second the substance of his 
preaching [so Stanley]. It were bettér to dis- 
tinguisb them as denoting, the first (λόγος), his 
private discourse, and the second (κήρυγμα), his 
public discourse [so Olsh., Riick., and most 
others]; or, the first, discourse in general, and 
the second, discourse in particular, viz., the 
proclamation of the Gospel [so Hodge]. Less 
probable is the opinion of de Wette [adopted by 
Alf.], who takes the two words as designating 
the same thing but in distinct aspects; the for- 
mer his style and course of argument, the latter 
his announcement of Gospel facts and conviction 
of their certainty.*—was not,—The verb here 
has to be supplied; either éyévero for ver. 8, or 





* [Why de Wette’s view should be termed “less probable,” 
when it is in perfect consistency with the use of the terms 


thus far, it is difficult to see.] 


52 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ἦν, meaning: was not furnished with (Luke iv. 
32); or: did not consist in. The character of 
his speech and preaching is described, 1, nega- 
tively—not in the persuasive words of 
wisdom, οὐκ ἐν πειϑοῖς σοφίας λόγοις.---[ἀνϑρω- 
πίνης : man’s, is a gloss, inserted most probably 
through a failure to perceive that the word thus 
far has been used in a strict and single sense, 
and from the consequent opinion that it needed 
some qualification. ‘‘Wisdom”’ is, all through, 
“synonymous with philosophy.”] The adjective 
πειϑοῖς has, from the earliest times, proved a 
stumbling block. It is found no where else in 
all Greek literature, though its use is warranted 
by analogous forms, as φειδός from φείδομαι. But 
the explanation, which would take πειϑοῖς as a 
substantive, in the sense of: persuasions, and 
put σόφίας λόγοις in apposition, is inadmissible, 
if only for this reason, that the plural of πειϑώ 
no where occurs. Hence have arisen manifold 
conjectures for changing the ordinary reading, 
none of which are well grounded, not even 
the suggestion so acutely maintained by Semler, 
Rincke, Fritzche, that the original read thus: 
οὐκ ἐν πειϑοῖ σοφίας in fitting antithesis to ἐν 
ἀποδείξει πνεύματος, since it is decisive against this, 
that this reading no where appears alone without 
λόγοις or λόγων. Even in the ordinary reading, 
‘“‘wisdom”’ may be regarded as expressing the 
main idea, inasmuch as ver. 5 demands this. 
πειϑός, otherwise πέϑανός [and as Meyer sug- 
gests, ‘probably a word in common, oral use.”’ ] 
convincing, winning, enticing, comp. rudavo- 
yoyia, Col. ii. 4. [Corinthia verba, pro exquisitis, 
et magnopere elaboratis et ad ostentationem nitidis. 
WerstEIn ad loc.| 2, positively—but in de- 
monstration of the Spirit and of power,— 
‘‘Demonstration” stands in strong contrast with 
‘‘persuasive words,” since the word is often used 
elsewhere also to denote strong, cogent proof in 
opposition to winning speech. The way in 
which it is to be taken here, depends upon the 
manner in which we construe the associated 
genatives. These express either the object of 
the demonstration or its subject. In the former 
case the phrase would mean the practical exhi- 
bition of the spirit, as the source of spiritual 
life, renewing, enlightening and sanctifying, and 
of the power which resides in this spirit and 
which it imparts to man. In the latter case, the 
Spirit must be regarded as dwelling in the 
Apostle himself, and working through him, dis- 
playing His power in the facts he proclaimed, by 
rendering them effective to salvation. What 
ability he had to convince and convert would 
thus be ascribed to the living energy of the 
Spirit whose minister he was. In this way, as 
Neander says, ‘‘the demonstration furnished by 
the Spirit would be in contrast with that pre- 
sented through words, and the demonstration of 
gi with that of logical argumentation. It is 
he testimony of the Spirit which alone Paul 
admits as valid.” This interpretation is to be 
preferred, since in the antithetic clause ‘ wis- 
dom” is to be regarded as the subject or source 
whence the persuasive words originate, or which 
begets and presents them. Hardly deserving of 
more than mention are expositions like that 
which takes “Spirit and power” as equivalent 
to: powerful spirit, or which explains the ‘de- 








monstration of the Spirit” to consist in the proof 
afforded by prophecies, and that ‘‘of power’ Ja 
the miracles Paul wrought (Origen and Grotius 

Even were prophecy and miracle to be thought of 
in this connection still they could not by any 
means have been exclusively intended. In any 
case, the reference must primarily have been to 
that moral power from above which ever accom- 
panied the preaching of the Apostle, and which 
acted upon the hearts and consciences of his 
hearers, awakening, agitating and quickening 
them to a new life. In all this there was a de- 
monstration of a higher sort, more influential for 
faith than the strongest arguments of philosophy. 

Ver. 5. Expressive of ultimate intent both of 
God in sending Him to preach as He did, and of 
Himself -acting in compliance with it,—that 
your faith should not stand in the wis- 
dom of men, but in the power of God.— 
The end of preaching is faith in Christ. But if 
this faith was grounded upon human wisdom 
and its arguments and persuasions, which .were 
only a superficial assent, then would the founda- 
tion be loose. It could remain only until assailed 
by strong arguments of a contrary sort. But if, 
on the other hand, faith rested upon a Divine 
demonstration, which while it convinced, con- 
verted also, and so took possession of the whole 
man, it was then fixed and immovable, and could 
victoriously withstand all the assaults of human 
power and art. 

[‘‘Longinus alludes to the abrupt and unsys- 
tematic style on which the Apostle prides himself, 
‘Paul of Tarsus was the first who maintained 
positive assertion without elaborate proof.’ ”— 
STANLEY]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The nature of faith in Christ.—It is a trust- 
ful surrender of soul to Him; a conviction con- 
cerning Him, which involves at the same time a 
union with His person, even as He is offered unto 
us for our salvation—hence, with Him as ‘the 
crucified.” It is a reception of Him in such a 
way that He dwells in us and we in Him. But 
this pre-supposes a renunciation of all self- 
confidence, and of all trust in any thing crea- 
turely and human, whether it be in the line of 
action, or permission, or of suffering, as avail- 
able before God for working out or earning sal- 
vation, or for establishing and restoring our fel- 
lowship with God. It isan act which can proceed 
only from a mind renewed and strengthened by 
the might of Divine love, since God’s Spirit and 
power are operative in it, showing and convincing 
the sinner on the one hand of his own guilt and 
insufficiency for himself, and on the other hand 
of the holy and compassionate love of God, His 
saving righteousness and His almighty grace in 
Christ; and this, too, in a way to take down all 
boasting, and beget an implicit reliance upon God 
alone. 

2. The sole means to produce faith.—This is 8 
style ofpreaching which presents the great facta 
of redemption directly to the heart in their sim~ 
ple Divine energy, without the accessories of 
human science and art. In such preaching, 
God’s Spirit and power can bear testimony, and 
glorify Christ, and bring to man’s consciousness 


CHAP. II. 1-5. 





the greatness, and holiness, and wisdom, and 
glory of His redeeming love in such a manner as 
to qualify the heart for an exercise of faith. 
Wheresoever, on the contrary, human rhetoric 
with its artifices, and human philosophy with its 
speculations, are mingled up with Gospel truth, 
there offered some obstruction is to the operation 
of the Divine power; there some purely human 
influence, such as the charm of style or of fine 
reasoning, it may be, supersedes the Divine in- 
fluence, and we fail of being drawn into the 
sphere of the truth itself, ‘“‘as it is in Jesus;” 
there human selfishness and pride still have free 
scope. As the result, we have instead of a firm 
and lasting faith, only a feeble, sickly opinion, 
which is ever ready to yield to counter-influences, 
or to changed humors, or to new systems of 
thought; which does not carry in itself the life 
of man in Christ, or of Christ in man; which is 
not heavenly, but earthly, not deeply rooted, but 
superficial, and ever ready to vanish away. 

ὃ. The mood and attitude of the Christian preacher. 
He who clearly perceives what faith is, and what 
is requisite for it, and what depends on it; who 
sees what barriers of every kind, especially of 
false culture and foolish pride, oppose themselves 
to it; who understands how the pure and artless 
preaching of Christ alone has power to awaken 
faith, and yet what prejudices there are against 
such preaching, and how little it is acceptable to 
men, especially to the highly educated classes, 
and to those who either practise or tolerate the 
grosser or more refined forms of wickedness, 
and how the whole life and being of a man strives 
against the truth which seeks to slay their sel- 
fishness and their sensuality,—a person who 
comprehends all this as he ought, will recognize 
and feel it to be a task transcending all human 
ability, and too difficult for him in the imperfec- 
tion of his spiritual life, to go abroad into the 
world, especially into the circle of the refined and 
learned, as a simple preacher of Christ crucified, 
and there maintain his stand. The persons he 
there meets, seek their satisfaction in art, and 
science, and learning; they take delight in lux- 
ury and sensual enjoyment; and the knowledge 
of this fact abates confidence, takes away boast- 
ing, begets timidity, awakens anxiety, yea bows 


a man to the very dust with a sense of his own, 


weakness. But for this very reason does he be- 
come all the more suitable an instrument for 
Christ. The more emptied he is of self, the more 
can God impart to him of His spirit and power, 
and work in him and through him, the more will 
he be disposed to cherish a holy courage and 
confidence in God. With ‘‘the foolishness of 
preaching” he will be ready to encounter a world 
full of obstacles, and find himself strong enough 
to overthrow all its bulwarks, while he will feel 
ashamed to resort to secular arts for gaining an 
entrance for himself. And the earnest endeavor 
_ of every one, through whom God achieves exploits, 
is to become just such a simple instrument of the 
Spirit in subduing the hearts of men through the 
word of truth, and winning them to Christ. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[1. Paul the pattern of an Evangelical preacher. 
On entering Corinth Paul was confronting his 





. 188 





severest task. He had just left Athens, where, 
notwithstanding his brilliant audience and great 
speech on Mars Hill, he had met with compara- 
tively small success. We read of no Church hav- 
ing been founded there. And now he is to offer 
the Gospel in a city that presented in many re- 
spects far greater obstacles than Athens did. In 
addition to the pride of philosophy there was to 
be encountered here a degree of luxury and vice 
no where else to be found. And if there was 
failure at Athens, how much more the likelihood 
of failure at Corinth? It is in view of these dis- 
couragements, that the picture which the Apostle 
has given us of himself obtains its peculiar inte- 
rest. The main features of it are 1. His inward 
feelings. He is not bold, defiant, self-assured, 
as an earthly warrior pushing up to an assault. 
On the contrary, he is much cast down, conscious 
of weakness, full of fear. To the outward sight, 
there is every thing against him. But while the 
flesh trembles, the spirit has courage to go on, 
being trustful in God. 2. His determination as 
to the course to be pursued. a. He will not cater 
to the tastes of the Corinthians, and think to win 
them by gratifying these. Fine oratory and 
subtle philosophy, however capable of these, he 
lays aside. They are not the means for winning 
faith, for saving souls. ὦ. He will simply pro- 
claim the testimony of God, holding up Christ in 
all His glory, and in all His shame, as the only 
means which God hath appointed to make man 
wise and holy, believing that however much this 
might scandalize the natural heart, it was the 
demonstration of God’s spirit and power which 
would alone prove mighty for the overthrow of 
Satan, and the setting up of God’s kingdom. 3, 
His aim. The faith he might awaken should rest 
in nothing he might say or do of himself, but 
solely in the exhibition which God should make 
of Himself through the Son whom He had set 
forth, and whom Paul was intent on holding up 
before the minds of men even to the utter hiding 
of himself from view ]. 

2. Heuspner:—The Christian must first unlearn 
in order to learn. To preach Christ the Cruci- 
fied is to put Him and His atoning work at the 
top, to set all truth in connection with these, and 
to derive all good from these (ver. 2). Self-dif- 
fidence in a preacher helps more than self-confi- 
dence. It isa great thing to stand in place of 
God and proclaim His word in presence of an- 
gels and men (ver. 3). Christianity is sufficient 
for itself and needs no adventitious aids. No 
preacher should so far humble himself as to seek 
these, nor should the people expect them. What 
is the demonstration of the Spirit and of power? 
(ver. 4). It is the conviction of sin and of the 
need of a Saviour, which the Spirit works in the 
heart through the Gospel. This is something 
which no man can effect of himself. Hence what 
the preacher has preéminently to strive for, is 
that the Spirit may operate through his word; 
and the hearers, that they may experience this 
heavenly power. In order that the preacher 
may make ‘demonstration of the Spirit,” he 
must have the Spirit. A faith which rests upon 
regard for a philosopher is 1, impure—a man’s 
name is put for Christ’s; 2, unsafe and fickle— 
human systems crowd each other out; 3, inope- 
rative—the Spirit of God is not its source; 4, not 


54 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


SS, TAT ee 


genuine—science has no faith-begetting power. 
Therefore a Christian’s faith should not rest upon 
scholastic wisdom, but on the power of God re- 
newing the heart. What a person has experi- 
enced within cannot be argued out. 

Hepincer:—Christ Crucified the preacher’s 
Alpha and Omega. Away with finery and feath- 
ers! Let the Spirit of God speak in thee. He 
knows how to hit the heart (ver. 2). Those con- 
ductors to salvation who have been proved in 
the furnace of affliction are the best approved. 
To the mariner on a wild sea, experience is 
every thing. To have only studied maps at 
school will prove of little account (ver. 3). 

Gossner:—The death of Christ must be recog- 
nized and credited. This is what captivates the 
heart, and kindles the fire that burns. Faith in 
the Son of God is the greatest miracle of grace. 
It is a great consolation that here and there one 
soul that hears us is made to experience the 
power of Christ’s blood for the forgiveness of 
sins. He who preaches Christ crucified must 
himself be ready for a crucifixion. Paul trem- 
bled while preaching that which blessed the 
world. Many false teachers, who betray the 
world and lull it into a death sleep, speak with 
bold front and without sense of danger. 

RirGer :—It is a question whether ministers 


and fear, and are not too assiduous in filling up 
the gaps and pauses with artificial efforts; 
whether they do not shrink too much from the 
criticism of the world, when it insists so strenu- 
ously upon calmness, fluency and ease in a 
speaker. But where there is life, there will be 
fluctuations. Living growth has to break through 
obstructions. 

[CuALMERS:—A minister has no ground to 
hope for fruit from his exertions until in himself 
he has no hope; until he has learned to put no 
faith in the point and energy of his sentences— 
until he feel that a man may be mighty to com- 
pel the attention, and mighty to regale the ima- 
gination, and mighty to silence the gainsayers, 
and yet not mighty to the pulling down of strong- 
holds]. 

[THoLuck. Vers. 1-5. Paul a type of the true 
preacher. 1. Contents of his sermon, ver. 2. IL. 
Tone of the preacher. Turremin. ver. 2. The 
knowledge of Christ the crucified. It includes a 
threefold knowledge. I. What man is. 11. What 
God is. III. What man should be. CHALMERs. 
vers. 4, 5. The necessity of the Spirit to give effect 
to the preaching of the Gospel. 1. Success of the 
teacher dependent on God in the ordinary 
branches of learning. II. The specialty in the 
work of the Christian teacher. ] : 





do not try too much to conceal their weakness : 


IlIl.—THE GOSPEL, WHICH ABJURES HUMAN WISDOM, HAS NEVERTHELESS A 
WISDOM OF ITS OWN. 


Cuarter II. 6-16. 


Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom [a wis- 
dom not] of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to naught: But we 
speak the wisdom of God [God’s wisdom]' in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, 
which God ordained before the world unto our glory; Which none of the princes of 
this world knew: for had they known 7t, they would not have crucified the Lord of 
9 glory. But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered 
into the heart of man, the things which? God hath prepared for them that love him. 
But God hath revealed them unto us’ by his* Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, 
yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth (οἶδεν) the things of a man, 
save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth [¢yvwxev ]® 
no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, 
but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given 
to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom 
teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost [the Spirit]® teacheth ; comparing spiritual things 
with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for 
they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually 


oOo ao 


15 discerned [judged of]. But he that is spiritual judgeth’ [of] all things*, yet he him, 
16 self is judged of [by] no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he 


may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ? 
1 Ver. 7.---ῤᾷ θεοῦ σοφίαν, so in all the best authorities, A. B. O. Ὁ. E. F. Cod. Sin., instead of σοφίαν θεοῦ. The emphasis 
being on θεοῦ. Then σοφίαν ev μυστηρίῳ come together, forming one complex idea.] 
Ver. 9.—a is better than ὅσα [the former, as it is found in A. B. C., Meyer, Stanley and Lach. prefer. But the Text, 
Rec. is supported by Ὁ, EB. F. G. Cod. Sin. and is adhered to by Words. and Alf.} : 
8 Ver. 10,—[{The proper order, supported by all the best authorities, is ἡμῖν δὲ ἀπεκάλυφεν 6 θεος. The emphasis is op the 
first words. “ Zo us, however, hath God revealed them.’’] 


Pa 


CHAP. II. 6-16. 





δᾶ 


- ------- 


4“ὙοΥ. 10.—Many good authorities omit αὐτοῦ : his. The omission is more explicable on the ground of what follows (τὰ 
yap πνεῦμα) than the omission of αὐτοῦ. [Yet it is omitted by A. B. C. Cod. Sin., doubted by Alf., rejected by Stanley. ] 


5 Ver. 11.—Instead of οἶδεν. 
ἔγνωκεν." 
κύριος γινώσκει. 


So the best MSS. and editions. 
The former simply means “knoweth;” the latter “to know by acquisition.” Words. 


[‘* There is a difference between the two words oidev and 
Yet we have in iii. 20 


6 Ver. 13.—ayiov, holy, is not well attested. A Gloss. [Omitted by A. B. C. Dl. F. G. Cod. Sin. and rejected by Words., 


Alf., Meyer.) 


7 Ver. 15.—év after avaxpivec is not original: has been inserted on account of the δὲ in the following clause [yet it is 
found in B. D3. BE. J. Cod. Sin., and is retained by Words., De Wette.] 
8 Ver. 15.—ra before πάντα 15 well supported. The omission is probably to be explained from the fact that some thought 


it necessary to take πάντα as accusative masce. in antithesis to οὐδενὸς. 


E. J. Cod. Sin.) 
9 Lach. instead of χριστοῦ reads κυριοῦ. 


ical repetition of νοῦν κυριοῦ above. ] 


EXEGETICAL AND ORITICAL. 


[In this section we have the other side of the 
matter under discussion. In view of Paul’s re- 
pudiation of “‘ wisdom,” it might be inferred by 
the Corinthians that Christianity was a narrow, 
partial, one-sided religion, suited only to one 
particular portion of human nature; that while 
it professed to be the friend of true piety and 
sound morals, it was at the same time a foe to 
science and free thought; yea, that it stood in 
entire antagonism to that which both universal 
opinion and the declarations of the Old Testa- 
ment esteemed ‘‘ more precious than rubies,” and 
was the ally of ignorance and barbarism. Such 
inferences it was important to obviate for the 
credit of Christianity, and in the interest of 
truth. Hence the Apostle goes on to state that 
the Gospel, which ignored human wisdom, and 
in some of its aspects carried the appearance of 
folly, did not abjure all pretense to wisdom, nor 
put contempt on the human intellect. He shows 
furthermore that while he deemed it expedient 
to confine himself when with the Corinthians to 
simple preaching, there was a sermonizing which 
went beyond this, and before fit audience could 
expatiate largely on the deep things of God]. 

Ver. 6. Wisdom however we do speak. 
—[The dé here as is in the E. V. is to be taken 
as strongly antithetic]. 2odi/av—the higher 
religious wisdom of Christianity. By this we 
are to understand not what merely concerns the 
form of discourse, such as an inspired way of 
speaking; nor yet what concerns its subject mat- 
ter, such as the future relations and events of the 
Kingdom of the Messiah, to which the immediate 
context is said to point. (Meyer). The correct 
view has been given by Osiander, and Bengel 
says: ‘‘Wisdom here denotes not all Christian 
doctrine, but its sublime and secret principles 
(capita sublimia et arcana) ;” he also puts λαλεῖν, 
to speak, in antithesis with κηρύσσειν, to preach, 
making the former to mean private instruction 
and the latter public speaking. But his inter- 
pretation of the word ‘‘wisdom” is too atomistic, 
and of the word ‘‘speak” too restricted. There 
is no reference here to any system of secret doc- 
trine. [What he does mean will be more fully 
considered hereafter, when all the characteris-, 
tics given of it have been surveyed]. But traces 
of this true wisdom are to be seen in several of 
Paul’s Epistles, especially in those to the Romans, 
Ephesians and Colossians, also in 1 Cor. xv. Its 
foundation is Christ (i. 30; comp. Col. ii. 3).— 
among them that are perfect, ἐν τοῖς τε- 
λείοις, τοῖο audience for this wisdom. The ‘‘per- 
fect” staud opposed to the beginners, ‘‘ the babes 


This is neither paramountly supported nor internally probable. 
Stanley; but Meyer, Alf., Words., sustained by A. C. Cod. Sin., 





(Some have it πάντας.) [Ta is not found in B. De, 


[So also 
adhere to the received text. Meyer regards it as a mechan- 


in Christ” (iii. i.), and are identical with ‘the 
spiritual.”” He means that what he had not been 
able to deliver to the Corinthians in the imma- 
turity of their Christian life, because they could 
not as yet apprehend it, he did announce among 
those of riper Christian experience. Thus we 
see that wisdom is the same as that which he 
calls ‘‘ meat” (iii. 2) as contrasted with ‘‘ milk.” 
The same antithesis appears in xiv. 20; Eph. 
iv. 13ff.; Heb. v. 11-14. To the Corinthians, 
as they were, he could only communicate what 
was suited to their yet weak powers of appre- 
hension, viz., the great facts of redemption, with 
their immediate practical consequences, with 
their christological presuppositions an their 
theological foundations. And this was done in 
the simple form of preaching, or of bare state- 
ment that the things were so, or had been so, or 
would be so as declared, accompanied by Scrip- 
ture proofs, such as are found in the book of 
Acts, and with applications to the inner and 
outward life of the hearers. But where, on the 
other hand, a greater maturity of Christian life 
and a capacity for the deeper comprehension of 
truth existed, there he was able to set all this 
forth in their fundamental proofs and in their 
intimate connections. There he was able to un- 


‘fold the whole Divine economy in accordance 


with its eternal principles and its progress 
through time and its fixed laws and in relation 
to its final consummation, so that that which 
Grecian wisdom was in search of within its own 
sphere was actually attained in a way that was 
incomparably higher and Divine, and better 
fitted to satisfy the deepest needs of a thought- 


‘ful spirit. 


The interpretation we have here given, which 
would seem to be decisively confirmed by what 
follows, is opposed by another on the ground, 
1, that it is one entirely foreign to the Apostle, 
since he nowhere in his Epistle contemplated 
‘‘the perfect’ as his readers (but how of Phil. 
iii. 15: Let us therefore as many as be perfect, 
ete )? 2, that it is in contradiction with ver. 2, 
(where, however, he is only speaking ef the first 
proclamation of the Gospel); and the sense given 
is this: that the simple, scandalizing doctrine 
of Christ crucified contains in itself the pro- 
foundest wisdom, encloses a Divine mystery 
which is intelligible only to the perfect. But 
this explanation, which is conveyed also in 
Luther’s translation, 1, has no sure grammatical 
support, since the preposition ἐν carries the idea 
of ‘‘in the judgment of,”’ only when the persons 
are mentioned, who appear to decide a case by 
their own opinions (comp. Passow Worterbuch, 
I. 2, p. 910), and especially in connection with 
such verbs as denote to be and to appear; 2, it 


56 





does not correspond with usage elsewhere to un- 
derstand ‘the perfect” to mean true Christians 
who seek true wisdom in Christ, or as Calvin 
does: ‘those who possess a sound and unbiased 
judgment.” —[The view just given is in the main 
that which is advocated by Calvin, Olsh. and 


Hodge, who in favor of it argues, “1. that those 


who regarded Paul’s doctrine as foolishness were 
not the babes in Christ, but the unrenewed, 
“the wise of this world;”’ consequently those 
to whom it was wisdom were not advanced Chris- 
tians, but believers as such. Throughout the 
whole context the opposition is between ‘the 
called,” or converted, and the unconverted, and 
not between one class of believers and another 
class. 2. If ‘‘the perfect’? here means advanced 
Christians, as distinguished from babes in Christ, 
then the wisdom which Paul preached was not 
the Gospel ‘as such, but its higher doctrines. 
But this cannot be, because it is the doctrine of 
the cross, of Christ crucified, which he declares 
to be the power of God and the wisdom of God, 
i. 24, And the description given in the follow- 
ing part of this chapter of the wisdom here in- 
tended, refers not to the higher doctrine of the 
Gospel, but to the Gospel itself. The contrast 
is between the wisdom of the world and the wis- 
dom of God, and not between the rudimental and 
the higher doctrines of the Gospel. Besides, 
what are these higher doctrines which Paul 
preached only to the élite of the Church? No 
one knows. Some say one thing and some an- 
other. But there are no higher doctrines than 
those taught in this Epistle and in those to the 
Romans and Ephesians, all addressed to the 
mass of the people. The New Testament makes 
no distinction between (πίστις and γνῶσις) higher 
and lower doctrines. It does indeed speak of a 
distinction between milk and strong meat, but 
that is a distinction, not between kinds of doc- 
trine, but between one mode of instruction and 
another. In catechisms designed for children 
the Church pours out all the treasures of her 
knowledge, but in the form of milk, ἡ. 6., in a 
form adapted to the weakest capacities. For all 
these reasons, we conclude that by ‘the perfect” 
the Apostle means the competent, the people of 
God as distinguished from the men of the world; 
and by wisdom, not any higher doctrines, but 
the simple Gospel, which is the wisdom of God 
as distinguished from the wisdomof men.” The 
argument is notconvincing. It seems obvious on 
the very face of his exposition, that the Apostle 
is here making a distinction between that simple 
“preaching” of Gospel facts which he had been 
adhering to among the Corinthians, and what he 
calls “wisdom” which he had thus far held in 
reserve at Corinth by reason of the incapacity 
of the converts there to apprehend it. And 
surely the distinction is one which is practically 
observed by all preachers. There is a Christi- 
anity embodied in facts which a child may learn 
and profit by; and there is a philosophy of 
Christianity, a system of doctrine, a theology, 
which is dispensed only to those of mature intel- 
lect and experience. And so far from admitting 
the custom of the Church in teaching children 
the Assembly’s Catechism, which surely cannot 
be called “milk,” as a valid argument in sup- 
port of the exposition, it may be a question 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


------ FH 


whether the custom itself does not fall under 
condemnation through the Apostle’s argument, 
The contrast is indeed between the wisdom of 
the world and the wisdom of God; but there ig 
also another contrast indicated by the ‘‘how- 
ever” with which the verse is introduced—a con- 
trast between κήρυγμα and σοφία, preaching and 
wisdom]. Accordingly we hold to the first ex- 
position as the only one well established: “In 
order to obviate all misapprehension of his lan- 
guage, Paul here asserts that the Gospel does 
include in itself the true wisdom. It is alto- 
gether foreign to his intent to set up an opposi- 
tion here between reason and revelation. On 
the contrary he here distinctly expresses the 
validity of a demand for a science that is to be 
unfolded out of Christianity; a science which 
must be the sole; true and all-satisfying science.” 
NEANDER.—but a wisdom not of this world. 
—He here distinguishes that profounder develop- 
ment of the fulness of Christian truth designated 
as “wisdom” from all that which passes for 
such in the world without. It was not anything 
which sprang up in the natural progress of the 
race, either before or apart from Christ. 
δέ as in Rom. iii. 22. ‘‘Like the German aber, it 
is used in particular when something is annexed 
in illustration as the complement of a sentence. 
That by ‘this world,” he does not mean sim- 
ply the great mass of mankind, the commonality 
only, but has in mind especially its leaders as 
those to whom this Christian wisdom was utterly 
foreign, is shown in the added words—nor of 
the princes of this world.—Does he mean 
by this the demons mentioned in Eph. vi. 12, as 
κοσμοκράτορας ἢ Hardly. *Apywr with this sense 
appears only in the Sing. John xii. 831; Eph. ii. 
2. And in any case these are not intended in 
ver. 8. According to Bengel the expression em- 
braces the leaders both of the Jews and of the 
Greeks. Not simply influential, learned men, 
philosophers; also not merely the members of 
the Jewish Sanhedrim, but all those of high sta- 
tion in general, the multitude of those who bear 
sway either by their authority -or by the respect 
which they command. These are described as 
persons who come to naught.—That is, they 
are bereft of all authority and consideration in 
the kingdom of God, in the world to come. He 
is not speaking here of their being overcome by 
the higher wisdom and power of Christianity, 
but of the utter destruction of their importance 
as leaders in that higher economy, at the insti- 
tution of which everything which springs out of 
this lower order of things is done away, however 
respectable it may appear. 

Ver. 7. Now comes the positive part of the 
description, which is introduced by an emphatic 
repetition.—But we speak God’s wisdom, 
i. e., ἃ wisdom which He has, and which He has 
imparted to us.—in a mystery.—lIt is doubtful 
with what this should be connected. Certainly 
not with the following participle, ‘ hidden,” 
which would be hardly grammatical and also 
tautological, but rather either with ‘*we speak "ἢ 
or with ‘‘wisdom.” The first_is to be preferred, 
because in connecting it with ‘* wisdom” the 
article in the Greek should be put before it for 
the sake of distinctness; and then the sense 
would be: we speak the wisdom of God asa 


The . 


CHAP. II. 6-16. 





mystery, i. ¢., as “something which does not 
proceed from the human understanding, but from 
the Divine revelation.”—NranpeR. Or ‘‘hand- 
ling it as a mystery.”—Meryer. Not however in 
the sense of any esoteric communications anala- 
gous to the Grecian mysteries to which neither 
here nor yet in the expression ‘‘perfect” (— 
initiated) is any allusion to be sought. But does 
not the explanatory participle following, viz., 
‘‘the hidden,” which certainly relates to wisdom, 
require us to connect the words ‘‘in a mystery” 
with ‘“‘wisdom?” The article after the anarthrous 
σοφίαν is neither necessary nor admissible if we 
translate it: ‘‘a wisdom consisting in mystery” 
[although, as Meyer says, ‘‘its omission would 
be at the cost of perspicuity.” Paul would, in that 
case, have expressed himself ambiguously which 
he might easily have avoided by the use of the 
article.” But, it may be asked, whether it is 
not quite in the Apostle’s style to put nouns in 
relation through a preposition in this way? Is 
not the σοφίαν ἐν μυστήρῳ exactly analogous with 
σοφία ἀπὸ ϑεοῦ ini. 80. What is meant by ‘‘speak- 
ing a thing in a mystery,” we cannot compre- 
hend, unless it is speaking it secretly or in a 
dark and obscure manner. Such must be the 
meaning of the term when made to qualify a 
verb. But certainly this was not what Paul 
intended to say, nor is it in accordance with the 
use of the terminthe N. T. Here ‘‘mystery”’ 
denotes not a quality or condition of obscurity 
but a fact or truth which is made known by re- 
velation. Hence it would exactly express the 
very thing in which Paul’s mission consisted, 
and instead of being connected with ‘‘speak” 
seems to us most naturally associated by the 
preposition ‘‘in”’ with ‘‘wisdom.” This view 
would seem to follow from Kling’s definition of 
the word ‘‘mystery.”] This in the N. T., and 
especially in Paul’s phraseology, denotes some- 
thing unknown to man—shut out from his com- 
prehension, and which is made known only 
through Divine revelation. I+ is used in parti- 
cular of the Divine purpose of redemption, es- 
pecially in respect to the participation of the 
Gentiles in the salvation wrought by Christ (Eph. 
iii. 3 ff.; Col. 1. 26 ff.) of the final restoration 
of Israel (Rom. xi. 24), and of the physical change 
which is to take place at the resurrection (1 Cor. 
xy. 51).—the hidden means either that which 
was concealed or zs concealed. It is the first, 
when a statement is added of the thing having 
been made known as in Rom. xvi. 25; Eph. iii. 
9; Col. i. 26. But it is the second, when it is 
meant, that the thing in question is withdrawn 
from human knowledge. In our passage, where 
the fact of concealment is first enlarged upon 
(ver. 8), and then afterwards a revelation to the 
elect of God is spoken of in contrast with a con- 
cealment from others, the latter meaning is to 
be preferred.—which God ordained.—This 
expression shows still more conclusively that 
“‘wisdom” is to be understood in an objective 
sense, not of the knowledge of the enlightened 
and of the doctrine flowing from it as such, but 
of its subject matter, that which elsewhere is 
called ‘‘a mystery ;” the Divine plan of salvation 
itself, in reference to the wisdom revealed therein; 








57 





complishing it.—before the ages.—He here 
goes back to the original ground of this redemp- 
tive scheme in the eternal purpose of God formed 
before the world was (comp. Rom. viii. 29 ff; 
and Eph. i. δ). The supplying of ““ἴο make 
known,” or “to reveal,” for the purpose of filling 
out a supposed elipsis, is not necessary. On the 
expression, ‘‘ before the ages,”’ compare the simi- 
lar expressions in (Rom. xvi. 25; Eph. i. 4; iii. 
9, 10; Col. i. 26; 2 Tim. i. 9). ‘God deter- 
mined on redemption before creation, 7. 6., al- 
ready at the very foundation of creation there 
existed a Divine purpose to establish a kingdom 
of God in the world and therefore He made it.” 
NreanpER.—unto our glory.—From the eternal 
ground of salvation he here turns to its final end, 
which also stretches forward into eternity. The 
glory he here speaks of is not the glory of the 
Church of the New Testament as cémpared with 
the Old, but as everywhere with Paul, when dis- ἡ 
coursing of believers, it denotes their full resto- 
ration to the Divine image. It is the state of 
redemption completed, wherein the spiritual life 
shines out in the effulgence of an incorruptible 
state. (Comp. Rom. ν. 2; viii. 18, 21; ix. 23; 
Col. i. 27; iii. 4; 1 Thes. ii. 12; 2 Tim. ii. 10.) 
What is said in 2 Cor. iii. 18 does not justify us 
in including here that inward glorifying of the 
soul which is involved in our regeneration, and 
which takes place in this life. If, with Meyer, 
we interpret the wisdom of God to mean ‘His 
spiritual philosophy which He has revealed to 
His ministers,” then we must understand this 
clause thus: which God has fore-ordained so 
that it should redound to our glory. This glory, 
which stands in contrast with the utter evanish- 
ment of this world’s princes, is supposed by some 
ta be that destined to be revealed at the coming 
of Christ in which Christians are to be partakers 
through that Divine wisdom. Butis this thought 
Pauline? Itmay be doubtful. Unquestionably, 
however, this thought is, that God’s eternal pur- 
pose, which comprises His plan of salvation, or 
in other words His wisdom, which proposes sal- 
vation for its object and devises the best means 
for its accomplishment, has for its final end our 
glorification. (Com. Rom. viii. 29 ff.) 

Ver. 8. Shows more fully how thoroughly 
hidden this wisdom was—which none of the 
princes of this world (or age) knew.— 


[The relative ‘‘which”’ is taken by Billroth and 


Stanley and others to refer to “glory.” ‘That 
which belonged to eternity and was before the 
ages, was not likely to be known to those who 
lived in time or in this age,” and this is still fur- 
ther justified by supposing an allusion to this in 
the expression ‘‘ Lord of glory.” ] But we are 
neither compelled nor justified in adopting this 
construction. The main thought of the passage 
is ‘‘God’s wisdom,” and it is to this that the 
relatives refer both in this and in the previous 
verse. What the Apostle here brings to view is 
the concealment in which God’s wisdom was 
kept, by showing how entirely it remained un- 
known and unsuspected by even the leaders of 
this world, who were deemed persons of keen 
insight and took the management of affairs, and 
the argument for this was,—they would not 


or we may say, the work of redemption including | otherwise have crucified the Lord of 
in itself its chief end and the sure means of ac- | glory.—For it was through Him that this Divine 


58 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ooo 232 90900000000 .--ΠΠΠΠΠΠΡὃΡὃΡῚ'͵᾿. 


wisdom, which devised the plan of salvation and 
aimed at the glorification of believers, was made 
known and carried out. And this, it were fair 
to suppose, they would not have done could they 
have seen the fulness of Divine wisdom and 
power which shone in him and which was flowing 
outupon others. ‘Paul here contemplates those 
who directly took part in the crucifixion as the 
representatives of that worldly spirit which was 
exhibited in the Greek phitosophy. They acted 
in the name and in the entire spirit of the ancient 
world.”—Neranver. ‘The Lord of glory.”—So 
also in Jas. ii. 1. This expression is not to be 
taken as equivalent to ‘glorious Lord,’ but, as in 
the analogous expressions, ‘‘ Father of glory” 
(Eph. i. 17); ‘The God of glory” (Acts vii. 2), 
“The Lord is the possessor of glory.” The 
genitive case used here in the Greek is the geni- 
tive of possession. ‘Lord of glory” is a title of 
Divinity. It means possessor of Divine excel- 
lence. ‘Who is the King of glory? The Lord 
of hosts, he is the King of glory” (Ps. xxiv. 10; 
Acts vii. 2; Jas. ii: 1; Eph. i. 17). The person 
crucified, therefore, was a Divine person. Hence 
the deed was evidence of inconceivable blindness 
and wickedness. It was one that could only 
have been done through ignorance. ‘And now, 
brethren,” said the Apostle Peter to the Jews, 
“T wot that through ignorance ye did it, as 
did also your rulers,” Acts iii. 17. The fact, 
that the princes of this world were so blind as 
not to see that Christ was the Lord of glory, 
Paul cites as proof of their ignorance of the wis- 
dom of God. Had they known the one, they 
would have known the other. This passage 
illustrates a very important principle or usage 
of Scripture. We see that the person of Christ 
may be designated from his Divine nature, when 
what is affirmed of Him is true only of his human 
nature. The Lord of glory was crucified; the 
Son of God was born of 2 woman; He who was 
equal with God humbled Himself to be obedient 
unto death. In like manner we speak of the 
birth or death of a man without meaning that 
the soul is born or dies, and the Scriptures speak 
of the birth and death of the Son of God without 
meaning that the Divine nature is subject to 
these changes. It is also plain that to predicate 
ignorance, subjection, suffering, death, or any 
other limitation of the Son of God, is no more 
inconsistent with the Divinity of the person so 
designated, than to predicate birth and death of 
& man is inconsistent with the immateriality and 
immortality of the human soul. Whatever is 
true either of the soul or body may be predicated 
of @ man as a person, and whatever is true of 
either the Divine or human nature of Christ may 
be predicated of Christ as a person. We need 
not hesitate therefore to say with Paul, the Lord 
of glory was crucified; or even in accordance 
with the received text in Acts xx. 28, ‘God 
purchased the Church with His blood.” The 
pa who died was truly God, although the 

ivine nature no more died than the soul of man 
does when the breath leaves his body.”—Hopar]. 

Ver. 9. Confirmatory citation.—But, as it 
has been written, what things eye hath 
not seen, and ear hath not heard, and 
into the heart of man have not entered, 
what things God hath prepared for them 





that love Him.”—[We have here given a literal 
translation of this passage as nearly as possible 
in the order of the Greek text]. 
to be considered here is the connection both logi- 
cal and grammatical. This has been attempted 
in various ways. One is, by supplying a supposed 
ellipsis after ‘‘but,”’ either by inserting the words 
‘it has happened,” so as to make it read, “but 
it has happened as is written” (Bengel); in 
which casea demonstrative clause would have been 
required after the relative clause ; or by inserting 
‘we speak,” taken from ver. 7. It would be 
more correct, however, without supplying any 
thing, to go back directly to ver. 7, and connect 
there, and to find in ver. 9 an expansion and 
enhancement of what is said in ver. 8. ‘* which 
none of the princes knew,” so that ἀλλά instead 
of being translated “but” might be rendered 
“yea, rather.” [This rendering is adopted by 
Stanley]. The reading would then be, “we 
speak God’s wisdom, which none of the princes 
knew, yea, which no eye hath seen.” In this case 
the clause, ‘for if they had known they would 
not have crucified, efc.’”’ would be taken as a sort 
of parenthesis, in order to facilitate the connec- 
tion with what precedes. We would then connect 
ver. 10, ‘‘but God hath revealed them to us” di- 
rectly with the previons words, ‘‘ what things 
he hath prepared,’’ inserting only a comma after 
‘‘him.”’ In this case, only, the repetition of the 


name ‘‘God”’ would appear strange, and would 


have to be regarded as done for the sake of em- 
phasis. If this does not suit, then wemay either 
assume an anacoluthon, so that in this break the 
sentence would seem to lose itself in mystery and 
distance inaudible (so de Wette and Osi.), or we 
may find the sentence completed in ver. 10, the 
proper antecedent being introduced with dé, but, 
as in ch. i. 23, to signify the antithesis there to 
ver. 8. It would then read ‘but what eye hath 
not seen, etc.;” these, ‘‘on the contrary, God 
hath revealed to us” (so Meyer and Alford) — 
Since the last mentioned mode of connection 
seems forced, and the reason assigned for the 
anacoluthon is not very clear, we prefer to assume 
a climax as above stated, introduced by ‘‘yea, 
rather,’ without joining ver. 10 directly to the 
preceding clause. [Hodge prefers the anacolu- 
thon, and very justly says, in reference to this 
citation and to that in chap. i. ver. 81, ‘in 
quoting the Old Testament the Apostle frequently 
cites the words as they stand, without so modi- 
fying them as to make them grammatically cohere 
with the context.’’].—There is yet another diffi- 
culty to be considered. Whence is the citation 
taken? Since no passage in the Old Testament 
is found exactly corresponding to it, the patris- 
tic expositors supposed that the words were 
taken, either from some Old Testament ‘Scrip- 
ture now entirely lost, or from some apocryphal 
prophety; and Z. Chrys. asserts that he had read 
these words in the apocalypse of Esaias. Gro- 
tius, however, supposes that they were taken 
from the writings of the Rabbis who had pre- 
served them out of an old tradition. But in op- 
position to these opinions it must be regarded as 
settled that Paul uses the formtla ‘as it is writ- 
ten” only in introducing citations from the Old 
Testament. Accordingly Meyer has adopted the 
solution that Paul quoted an apocryphal passage 


The first point — 


CHAP. II. 6-16. 


CE 


under the idea that the words were in the Old 
Testament. But before we resort to any such 
explanation, it is to be seen whether the dissimi- 
larity between our passage and the: Old Testa- 
ment texts in question is so great, as to prevent 
us from supposing that he quoted freely here, as 
he has also done elsewhere, and as other New 
Testament writers have also occasionally done. 
Certainly Paul could hardly have had in mind 
Isa. 111. 15. 5 For that which hath not been told 
them should they see, and that which they had 
not heard, should they consider;” nor yet lxv. 
17; ‘For bebold [ create new heavens, and a 
new earth, and the former should not be remem- 
bered nor come into mind,” unless perhaps 
the last clause, in the ring of the expression. 
But he may have had in mind Isa. lxiv. 4, ac- 
cording to the original text: ‘‘For since the 
world have men not heard, nor perceived, nor 
hath an eye seen, O God, besides’ Thee; he will 
do it for him who waits upon Him”* — here 
there is a transition from the second person to 
the third, as is frequently the case in prophetic 
diction — since the formula, ‘‘as it is written,” 
admits of a free quotation, and Paulis not always 
precise in adhering to the words (1. 19, 31; xiv. 
21; Rom. ix. 88). We therefore unhesitatingly 
accord with Osiander in maintaining a reference 
here to Isa. lxiv. 4. The sense common to both 
passages is, that God has prepared for His people 
who wait for Him, things far exceeding all human 
experince or observation, ἐπὸὲ καρδίαν ἀναβαίνειν 


Heb. Εν by my lit. to come upon the heart, 


to become a matter of experience and thought.—In 
the word, ‘‘prepare”’ we have the carrying out 
of the “fore-ordination”’ mentioned in ver. 7.— 
But what does the Apostle mean by ‘‘the things 
prepared?” Meyer says the salvation of the 
Messianic kingdom (comp. Matth. xxv. 34.) Very 
well, but not simply in its future glories. What 
is intended is the whole work of redemption in 
all its essential particulars, from the foundation 
laid for it in Christ, on unto its final consumma- 
tion. They are the benefits never before known 
or imagined, and far transcending all concep- 
tion and surmise which are contained in God’s 
revelation, and the glory aimed at and procured 
by it. ‘“‘They are the gracious gifts and disclosures 
of blessedness, an insight into which, and an en- 
joyment of which are afforded us even here in 
faith, whose full fruition is reserved for a higher 
world.” Ostanper. That deliverance from exile 
to which the passage in Isaiah primarily refers, 
+7 
Γ The margin of the E. V. renders the last part of this 
verse, “neither hath seen a God besides Thee, that doeth 
so for him, etc.” ‘his version is given by Ewald, de Wette, 
and Lowth. It is found also in the lxx. Luther’s version, 
following the Vulgate, gives it as in the English text. Un- 
questionably the former are correct in putting “‘God ” in the 
accusative case. It is also noteworthy that the clause “ nor 
perceived by the ear,” is not in the lxx., and Lowth thinks 
either that this passage has been corrupted by the Jews, or 
that Paul quotes from some apocryhal book, either “ The 
Ascension of Esaias,’”’ or “ The Apocalypse of Elias,” in both 
of which the passage is found as cited by Paul. It will be 
seen, likewise, that this clause is omitted by Paul, and that 
he has inserted another phrase instead—* Neither have en- 
tered into the heart of man;” καὶ emt καρδίαν ἀνθρώπον ovK 
ανέβη; and these words are so similar to οὐ μὴ επέλθῃ 
αυτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν found in the ΙΧχ. Is. Ιχγ΄ 17, that one 
can hardly avoid the belief that the two passages were 


blended together in the Apostle’s mind, and were freely 
quoted to suit his case.] 








59 





— 





is in truth only a faint image of that which is to 
be considered as the literal fulfilment of all such 
expression (comp. also Matth. xiii. 17). 

Vers. 10-12. The revelation of this wisdom: 
and its means. —But to us God hath revealed. 
them through His Spirit.—‘‘ To us,”’ that is, 
Paul himseir and his fellow-Apostles; for of 
Christians in general he is not speaking. See: 
vers. 6 and 16—also iii. 1. [So Hodge; Stan- 
ley, however, says ‘‘ believers generally, but with. 
a special reference to himself’’]. The communi- 
cation here is not of an external, but of an in~ 
ternal sort. (Comp. the expression, ‘‘to reveal in. 
me,” Gal. i. 15). This is clear also from the: 
agency employed. This agency is the Spirit,. 
who executes God’s purposes of redemption and 
is the means of enlightening them in the know~- 
ledge of their nature. He does this work so far- 
as He is “freely given of God,” ver. 12. The: 
possibility of this revelation by the Spirit is. 
shown in the following words—for the Spirit 
searcheth all things. yea, the deep things. 
of God.—‘‘ The Spirit” here is evidently, by 
reason of the connection, the same as ‘‘ His Spi-- 
rit” in the previous clause. Only there He is: 
introduced as proceeding outwards and working: 
ad extra, but here and in what follows as immi- 
nent or existing within the Godhead. An analo- 
gous expression occurs respecting the Son of’ 
God in Jno. i. 18, where the phrase ‘who is in. 
the bosom of the Father”’ corresponds with “the. 
Spirit searcheth all things,” etc.; and the word: 
“declare” with ‘‘hath revealed by His Spirit.” 
The ability to make known the thoughts of God 
unto the Apostles is here grounded upon the 
knowledge the Spirit has of these things in their 
inmost source and profoundest depths. This is 
expressed by épevvay: lit. to explore, to search 
through and through; but here, and wherever else 
it is used of Divine knowledge, it denotes the 
result of that exploring, ὁ. 6. a complete and 
thorough knowledge (comp. exxxix.1; Rom. viii. 
27—xapdioyvaoryc of Acts i. 24; xv. 8 and Rey. 
ii. 23. Chrys. ἀκριβὴς γνῶσις κατάληψις.) Bad: 
ϑεοῦ: inmost recesses of God, the otherwise un- 
explorable depths where His thoughts and voli- 
tions have free play, the hidden mystery of His. 
personality which correspond to those mysteries. 
of His kingdom and of all His works and ways. 
which the Spirit reveals. The image is drawn 
from the sea, whose depths are supposed to be. 
unfathomable and bottomless. (Ps. xxxvi. 75- 
xcii. 6; Job. xi. 8). Meyer says: ‘The entire. 
abounding fulness which God has in Himself,. 
every thing which goes to make up His being,, 
His attributes, thoughts, plans, decrees.” (Not. 
the latter exclusively). See also the phrase: 
‘depths of Satan,” Rev. ii. 24, That such must 
be the office of the Spirit, and of Him alone, is: 
now illustrated by an analogy.—Ver. 11. For- 
who of men knoweth the things of a man, 
save the spirit of man which isin him? 
Even so the things of God no one know-. 
eth save the Spirit of God.—tThe logic is 
this: “The Spirit and only He can know the 
depths of God. For as the spirit of man which 
is in him can alone know what is of him, so only 
the Spirit of God can know what is of God.” 
The Apostle puts the first member of the com- 
parison in the form of ἃ question. ‘‘Who of men 


60 





knoweth, etc.?” 
men, is not superfluous. The ignorance here 
implied is not an absolute one, inasmuch as God 
is to be excepted from it (Osi.); or, we may say, 
it carries a prominent emphasis: ‘*no MAN knows 
what is of man” (Meyer)—rd τοῦ ἀνϑρώπου, 
not Baty: “the things of a man” in general; 
not his ‘depths.’ According to the context, the 
things alluded to must be limited to those of his 
inner life, his secret thoughts and purposes. 
The ‘‘spirit” of man is the breath of God in 
him, ‘‘the candle of the Lord searching all the 
inward parts of his belly” (Prov. xx. 27), the 
inner eye or light (Matth. vi. 23), that whereby 
he becomes evident to himself, recognizes his 
own distinct individuality, is conscious of him- 
self, and of his thoughts and acts as belonging 
to himself, the Divine image in man, the princi- 
ple of his personality. (See Delitzsch, Bid. 
Psychologie, 8. 116 ff.; Beck, Bibl. Seelenlehre, 8. 
947). By the words “which is in him,” the 
spirit, as the principle of self-consciousness, is 
distinguished from the spirit in others, as the 
principle of objective knowledge. A like addi- 
tional qualification to ‘‘the Spirit of God”? would 
be out of place, either because God is absolutely 
one, or because His Spirit is also dispensed to 
others, as seen in the next verse: ‘‘which is from 
God” (Meyer). De Wette says: ‘Paul conceives 
of the Spirit not as being in God, as though He 
were the principle of God’s self-consciousness ; 
but he very wisely says merely ‘the Spirit of 
God” in order that he might thus hold the way 
open for saying afterwards ‘the Spirit from 
God.” The substance of the comparison is this: 
as the knowledge of the inward man is possible 
only through self-consciousness, so is the know- 
ledge of God possible only through the conscious- 
ness of God obtained by means of the Holy Spi- 
rit. De Wette, however, overlooks an important 
element in the Apostle’s course of thought, in 
that the Apostle makes the immanent beholding 
of the depths of God on the part of the Spirit the 
ground of his function asarevealer. But the 
Spirit of God (in accordance with the analogy 
of the human spirit which is derived from Him 
and is his image) is the principle of the Divine 
self-knowledge, the ground of God’s life as a 
self-conscious existence—that whereby God is 
personal life, is the One who is eternally and ab- 
‘solutely cognizant of Himself in all His thoughts, 
volitions and decrees, in His doing and working, 
—the One who is revealed unto Himself and then 
reveals Him abroad to others—the One who sees 


through Himself and also shines through the. 


human spirit and so qualifies it for looking into 
the work of God. [*‘ The analogies of Scripture, 
however, are not to be pressed beyond the 
point they are intended to illustrate. The point 
here is the knowledge of the Spirit. He knows 
what is in God as we know what is in ourselves. 
It is not to be inferred from this that the Spirit 
of God bears in other points the same relation to 
God that our spirits do to us.” Hopaz.] Having 
thus shown the ability of the Spirit to reveal the 
things of God, he reaffirms and corroborates the 
declaration of ver. 10.—Now we have re- 
ceived, not the spirit of the world, but the 
Spirit which is from God.—The expression 
is antithetic. But what are we to understand by 





Here the gen., ανϑρώπων, of | the spirit of the world?” 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


Certainly not any 
mental peculiarity; as most imagine, (Beza: in- 
genium humanum, [Barnes and others]: doctrina 
humana; [de Wette and Stanley: spirit of hu- 
man wisdom; Hodge: a paraphrase for human 
reason]), since the thing contrasted with it 
cannot be explained inthis manner. Neither can 
it be construed ironically, as denoting an utter © 
want of that which is spiritual, or that show of — 
spirit which the world calls spirit (see Osi.}, nor 
yet as the finite spirit, in so far as it sets up 
independently for itself (Billroth). But it means 
that principle which controls the world in its 
thought and volition, and which is elsewhere 
termed ‘‘the prince of this world (Jno. xii. 31); 
also ‘the god of this world” (comp. Eph. ii. 2; 
vi. 11 ff.; 1 Jno. iv. 3; v.19). Meyer says: 
“The diabolic spirit under whose control the 
world is held, and which profane humanity pos- 
sesses.” Osiander discovers in it ‘a demonic 
element, blending in with, however, and mani- 
festing itself in connection with splendid natural 
powers —a principle of selfish curiosity which 
excites and stimulates the mental faculties to 
knowledge, but does not overcome their weak- 
ness, and which, while alienated from God, ever 
remains involved, not merely in weakness and 
ignorance, but also in perverseness and error.” — 
but—lInasmuch as he is treating no more of 
operations imminent in the Godhead, but of acts 
of external revelation, the subject in contrast is 
denominated—the Spirit which is from God. 
—‘‘He brings to view the spirit as having been 
already bestowed.” NeanpER. This spirit, coming 
as it does from God, and the bestowment of which 
conditions the knowledge of Divine things, and 
which belongs only to the children of God (comp. 
Rom. v. 5; viii. 9 ff.; 14 ff.; Jno. xv. 26), is to 
be entirely distinguished from the “spirit of 
man” which belongs to us as men, and makes us 
akin to God (Acts xvii. 29), and which consti- 
tutes our personality (ver. 11), and which is the 
immediate organ of the Spirit of God, needing, 
however to be renewed, and, because of its weak- 
ness, requiring to be strengthened. (Eph. iv. 
23; Rom. vii. 22 ff.; 1 Thess. v. 28; comp. 
Matth. ii. 15, 16). The object of the bestowment 
of the Spirit is—that we might know the 
things which are freely given to us by 
God.—These things are the same as those 
spoken of in ver. 9 as having been ‘‘ prepared” 
for us (comp. i. 830; Rom. viii. 24; vi. 28; Eph. 
ii. 8,9). τὰ χαρισϑ ἐν τα, (from χαρίζεσϑσι, as 
Rom. viii. 82)—gifts of free grace. By these are 
meant the blessings of God’s kingdom which™ 
Christians already possess in faith and hope, but 
which they will enjoy in full perfection when the 
kingdom of God has been set up in glory. [Hodge 
very singularly says: ‘‘not so. The connection 
is with ver. 10, and the subject is the wisdom of 
God, the Gospel as distinguished from the wis- 
dom of this world.” But what are the topics of 
this Gospel but the spiritual blessings here seen 
and known in part, but afterwards to be known 
as we also are known? A distinction here is 
untenable]. The persons to whom they are given 
(ἡμῖν) are Christians generally, as must appear 
from the very nature of the case [and the know- 
ledge they obtain is ‘‘the assurance of confi- 
dence.” Catvin. Those who receive the Spirit 


, ὡ oie 





CHAP. II. 6-16. 


61 


.-.- oo va a 


not only have a clear apprehension of the bless- 
ings God hath provided, but discern them as 
‘freely given unto them.” This must be so, as 
knowledge in the Scriptures is one with expe- 
rience. There is no real perception without 
possession ]. 

Ver. 13. Having indicated the source of Gos- 
pel-wisdom, Paul proceeds to show how he pro- 
claimed it, taking up the thought of ver. 4.— 
Which things we also speak.—That the 
speaking here is directly connected with the fact 
of having received of the spirit from the purpose 
of knowing and declaring, and proceeds from it, 
and is of a sort corresponding to the nature of 
the objects received, is shown by word, καί: 
“also.” How he spake is exhibited antitheti- 
cally.— Not in words taught of human 
wisdom, οὐκ ἐν διδακτοῖς ανϑρωπινῆς 
σοφίας Adyorc.—The Gen. hereis governed not 
by λόγοις but by διδακτοῖς. (Comp. διδακτοὶ ϑεοῦ, 
taught of God, Jno. vi. 45). [Most of the older 
English versions and Calyin construe the other 
way. Wiclif: not in wise wordes of mannes 
wisdom. Tyndale: not in the connyuge wordes 
of mannes wysdome. Rheims: not in learned 
wordes of humane wisedom. Cranmer and Ge- 
neva translate very nearly as the authorized 
version]. He means not in an artificial style of 
discourse, fashioned after the rules of scholastic 
rhetoric and dialetics, but in those taught of 
Spirit.—Ilvetimuaroc without the article asin 
ver. 4, because it is to be taken qualitatively as 
denoting a principle higher than that of human 
wisdom. Weare not here to suppose that any 
actual dictation of the language is intended, but 
only an operation of the Spirit upon the mind, 
‘‘which strongly pervades and controls even the 
speech and modes of exhibition;” in short a 
simple discourse which proceeds directly from a 
heart possessed by the Spirit of God. [Hodge 
says: ‘‘This is verbal inspiration, or the doc- 
trine that the writers of the Scriptures were con- 
trolled by the Spirit of God in the choice of the 
words which they employed’ in communicating 
divine truth. This has been stigmatized as the 
mechanical theory of inspiration. It is ob- 
jected to this, that it leaves the diversity of 
style which marks the different portions of the 
Bible, unaccounted for. But if God can control 
the thoughts of a man without making him a 
machine, why not also his language?—rendering 

_every writer infallible in the use of his charac- 
teristic style? If the language of the Bible be 
not inspired, then we have the truth communi- 
eated through the discoloring and distorting 
medium of human imperfection. Paul’s direct 
assertion is that the words he used were taught 
by the Holy Ghost.” Wordsworth adds: ‘ Here 
is a sufficient reply to the assertions of those who 
allege that the inspiration vouchsafed to St. Paul 
was limited to a general perception of divine 
truth and that he was left himself without divine 
guidance as to the form in which that truth was 
to be expressed. A caution also is thus supplied 
against the notion that there are verbal inaccura- 
cies, and blemishes, and defects in St. Paul’s re- 
presentations of the supernatural truths which he 
was commissioned to deliver. Comp. Hooker, 
II. viii. 6, and Serm. vy. 4; also Routh, Rele- 
quie Sacre, Vol. V. pp. 890-841]. This is 





clear from the explanatory clause [which we 
render—Combining spiritual things with 
spiritual. 1---πνευματικοῖς πνευματικὰ συγκρίνοντες. 
The interpretation of this depends on the expla- 
nation we give to συγκρίνοντες. This signifies 
originally, to combine together with judicious selec- 
tion, then to unite in general, to join, the opposite 
of διακρίνειν; with this then comes the idea to 
hold together, t. e., by way of comparison (2 Cor. 
x. 12), [this is the meaning adopted in the E. 


| V.]; out of this there follows the idea of mea- 


suring, estimating according to something; and 
then of interpreting or expounding, as it is used in 
Gen. xl. 8 and Dan. v. 12 in reference to dreams, 
in which cases the signification to judge must be 
referred back to the idea of holding together the 
various elements of the process so as to get a 
proper view of them. At any rate there is 
nothing in these last passages to justify our 
taking the word in the text to mean unquali- 
fiedly to explain [as Stanley does] whether we 
take πνευματικοῖς as Masculine [rendering 
as Bengel, Riickert, Stanley: ‘‘to spiritual men” ] 
(which is by no means required by the ver. 14, 
since a new paragraph opens there), or as Neu- 
ter; rendering it ‘by spiritual things,” mean- 
ing thereby either the Old Testament types used 
to explain the New Testament (as Chrysostom 
and others), or the testimonies of the Prophets, 
which, being inspired by the Spirit, are the fit 
illustrations of the things which Christ has re- 
vealed by His Spirit (as Grotius and others), 


-both which ideas are remote from the connec- 


tion, or ‘with spiritual words” (as Elsner and 
others). [Wordsworth interprets this clause 
comprehensively. ‘Blending spiritual things 
with spiritual,” 7. ¢., not adulterating them with 
foreign admixtures (2 Cor. ii. 17; 1 Pet. ii. 2) 
also ‘‘combining,”” for the purpose of comparing 
and explaining, ¢.g., the things of the New Testa- 
ment by the Old Testament, or one spiritual 
truth by another]. Nor yet do we agree with 
Neander’s view, ‘‘that which has been commu- 
nicated to us by the Divine Spirit we explain 
in a form which is suited to that communica- 
tion.” The only correct interpretation is to 
take συγκρίνειν in its original import, and mvev- 
ματικοῖς as Neuter, and to render as above, car- 
rying the meaning: uniting the spiritual mat- 
ters which are the subject of our discourse 
(λαλοῦμεν, ver. 12) with words and forms that 
are taught of the Spirit. So Castalio, Calvin, 
Osiander, Meyer. [Hodge and Barnes]. Thus 
understood the clause serves to illustrate still 
further the suitableness of the style of discourse 
just before advocated, and as Osiander rightly 
observes, contains no tautology, since rather 
‘‘the thought is here stated in the form of a 
fundamental principle, and is taken up and set 
forth with stronger emphasis.”* 





[* The view given, but not advocated by Bengel and Stan- 
ley, seems deserving of more attention than Kling has be- 
stowed upon it, and may fairly dispute the ground with that 
he has given. Svyxpivew, whatever may be its classical 
meaning, is used in the LXX. in six places at Jeast, with the 
unquestioned signification of: to explain, to make that 
which was mysteriously hinted in visions clear to ordinary 
minds. This was what Joseph did to the chief butler and 
chief baker, and to Pharaoh, and what Daniel did to Bel- 
shazzar. And Paul is here speaking of dealing with things 
of like nature, 7. ¢., supernaturally revealed, which eye had 
not seen, etc. And what more natural than for him to use 


02 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
Ee τ τ ey PELE MR ER Rat PANU συ συ. 


Ver. 14. [Explains the reason why this higher 
spiritual wisdom is notindiscriminately imparted, 
but ‘spoken only to the perfect.” It is seen in 
the incapacity of multitudes to apprehend it, and 
to discern ‘‘the Divine impress it bears both on 
its contents and style of delivery.” It is an in- 
ability arising from ‘‘their essential character, 
which is as opposed to the Gospel as it is in 
every respect harmoniously consistent with it- 
self.” ].—But the natural (or psychical}) man. 
—yuyixog δὲ ἄνϑρωπος. Here we have the 
character described. Luther explains it thus: 
‘‘the natural man is one who, though he stands 
apart from grace, is still endowed to the fullest 
degree with understanding, sense, capacity and 
art.” He is the opposite of ‘‘ the spiritual man,” 
see Jude ver. 19. ψυχικοί, πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες, 
lit.: ‘‘psychical, not having the spirit.” ψυχή: 
Psyche, soul, Latin, anima, is the intermediate 
between mvevua, spirit, and σώμα, body (1 Thess, 
γ. 23). It is the personal life of the individual 
(Ichleben) arising from the entrance of the spirit 
into the earthly organ of ‘the body as its breath 
of life, in which personal life the spiritual and 
the sensuous elements are combined, the one 
entering into the other. The spiritual element, 
by becoming psychical or natural, forms a power 
of consciousness and volition, sinks into the life 
of sensation and impulse and embodies itself in 
the man and becomes organic. The sensuous 
element on the other hand (which taken out of 
the world of sense the soul fills with its life of 
sensation and impulse), being possessed by the 
spiritual power, becomes itself spiritualized in 
conscious self-directed activity and made capable 
of intelligent knowledge and volition. By reason 
of this its double nature, the soul becomes depen- 
dent on springs of life that belong as well to the 
world of sense as to the spiritual world. But, 
with particular individuals, the soul exercises a 
free choice in regard to the degree and order in 
which from time to time these influences from 





"συγκρίνειν in precisely the same sense as in the former 
cases. The allusion is almost palpable. Rendering the 
word then explaining, the train of thought requires that we 
take πνευματικοῖς as Dative Mas: . to spiritual persons. 
Here, then, we see the Apostle reverting back to the thought 
with which the paragraph opens, “that of speaking wisdom 
among the perfect.” “The spiritual things” here are the 
contents of this wisdom, “ the perfect ” are “ the spiritual.” 
And thus we have a hinge on which the course of thought 
passes easily over into what follows, and the δὲ of ver. 14 has 
its natural antithetic force. ‘Explaining spiritual things 
to the spiritual, but the natural man,” etc. ‘This, it is inte- 
resting to note, is the first construction given of this passage 
in an English version. Wiclif renders: ‘*‘ Maken a liknesse 
of spiritual things to goostli men, for a besteli man per- 
suyued not through thingis,” ete. Here, how-ver, we have 
a new meaning to ovyxpivovres, equivalent to: making spi- 
Titual things match with spiritual men. And is this the 
meaning of the Rhemish version: “comparing spiritual 
things to the spiritual?” This evidently is a literal trans- 
ferring of the Vulgate “comparantes,” which is derived 
from “compare,” and has for its first meaning to match to 
pair. Calvin has still another interpretation: “adapting 
spiritual words to spiritual things,” which Beza snbstan- 
tially adopts. Here there is simply an inversion of ideas.] 


[t It is to be regretted that there are no adjectives in 
English which distinctly preserve the important distinctions 
observed in Scripture between body, soul, and spirit. Much 
obscurity oftentimes arises in consequence, and we fail to 
perceive the profound philosophy which underlies Paul’s 
doctrine. The adjective corresponding to the noun soul our 
translators render “natural.” This is not a bad translation 
if we bear in mind the equivocal use of the word nature: 
that it either may mean, the course of things as they are, or 
the course of things as they ought to be,” and that it is in 
the former sense the text takes it.] 








above and below shall be appropriated and em- 
ployed. It depends on its pleasure whether it 
shall isolate itself, and, with this, sever its own 
spiritual part from the Divine life of the Spirit, 
or whether it shall receive this life into itself, 
Now in separating from the life of the spirit, 
man, as a natural or psychical creature, gets 
divested of his spiritual character and becomes 
fleshly. There is, indeed, in him still a spiritual 
element: but then it no longer rules as a con- 
trolling principle, regulating his impulses and 
desires. On the contrary, being in subjection to 
the soul (ψυχή), the spirit becomes more and 
more subservient to the soul’s perverse and car- 
nal tendencies, from whence there springs deceit, 
falsehood, defilement in spirit, through contact 
with corresponding evil, and also that earthly 
and worldly wisdom spoken of in Jas. 111, 15. 
The soul, in itself robbed of the spiritual element, 
as a personal life (as spirit), is also unable to 
work out the spiritual things into a clear, intel- 
ligent apprehension by a free conscious effort of 
its own. Hence the mere soul-man, in other 
words the psychical or natural man, has neither 
inclination nor eye for the spiritual. He is 
closed up against all higher wisdom as if it were 
but folly. (Comp. Beck, Bibi. Seelenlehre, 3 14 
ff, 83 ff; Lehrwiss, δῇ 207 and 2138. From all 
this it will be seen that the translation ‘‘sensu- 
ous,” ‘‘sinnlich,”’ is not exhaustive. With this 
there is included also the idea of the selfish. 
Besides, both the intellectual and ethical aspects 
are also to be taken into account. See Osiander, 
de Wette, Meyer*.—The ethical side of ‘the 
psychical man,” v7z., his disinclination towards 
the higher sphere of life, appears in what is 
affirmed of him.—receiveth not the things 
of the Spirit of God.—For δέχεσϑαι here is 
not—to understand, which thought is afterwards 
expressed by γνῶναι, but it means: 10 accepl, to 
receive, as always in the N. TT. (Luke viii. 13; 
Acts viil. 18: xi. 1; xvii. 11; 1 Thess) τ δ 
18, ete.). οὖ δέχεται--εἀπωϑεῖται, Acts xiii. 46. 
‘“‘He will not accept them, although they are 
offered.” —Brnaet. The phrase, “the things of 
the Spirit of God,” combines what was distin- 
guished in ver. 13, the Divinely spiritual both in 
form and substance. The reason of this rejec- 
tion is explained,—because they are foolish- 


ness unto him.—‘Whereas,” adds Bengel, 


‘she is seeking after wisdom.” And these things 
seem foolish, because they conflict with his 
narrow, foregone conclusions and prejudices.— 





[* See also Owen, vol. iii. p. 247, where, basing his exposi- - 


tion on 1 Cor. xy. 44, he says: “ὙΠῸ ψυχικός (7.e.) the natural 
man, is one that bath all that is or can be derived from the 
first Adam, one endowed with a rational soul and who bath 
the use and exercise of all his rational faculties.” He takes 
strong ground against those ‘ who tell us that by this ‘ na- 
tural man’ isintended ‘a man given up to his pleasur.s and 
guided hy his brutish affections and no other.” See his 
citations from Augustine and Chrysostom to the same effect. 
A profound analysis of this important subject, in all its con- 
nections, is given also in Miiller on Sin, vol. i. p. 457, vol. ii. 
p. 367. Calvin: “The natural man (7.e.) not merely the man 
of gross passions, but whoever is taught only by his own 
faculties.” And Bengel quotes Ephraim Cyrus: “The Apostle 
calls men who live according to nature natural, ψυχικούς, 
those who live contrary to nature, carnal, capxixovs; but 
those are spiritual, πνευματικοί, who even change their 
nature after the spirit.” An able disquisition on the “ Tri- 
partite Nature of Man,” in all its bearings on Christian 
doctrine has lately been issued by Rey. J. B. Heurd, of Eng 
land.) 


CHAP. II. 6-16. 





and he is not able to know them.—This 
clause is either to be joined to the previous one, 
as assigning an additional reason for the natural 
man’s not receiving spiritual things, g. d., ‘‘he 
considers it absurd, without being able to un- 
derstand it” (Meyer, [Alford, Stanley, Tischen- 
dorf]); or to be taken as parallel to the.clause, 
‘he receiveth it not,” and expressing the in- 
tellectual side of the case in an independent 
manner, so that the following words stand 
related to it alone ([Calvin, Hodge, Barnes, 
and others, in accordance with 1 6. y.]). The first 
is the more correct. The natural man contemns 
spiritual things through prejudice and lack of ap- 
prehension,—because they are spiritually 
judged of.—The reason here assigned bears 
upon both the previous clauses which together 
explain why the Gospel is rejected. It appears 
all™ foolish and incomprehensible, alike from 
the fact that it requires to be looked at in a 
way for which the natural man in unfitted. ἀνα- 
κρίνειν, to judge of, a8 in iv. 3; ix. 3; xiv.24. It 
denotes the result of investigation and proof, 
which it primarily in fact signifies (Acts xvii. 11; 
iv. 9; xii. 19.) πνευματικῶς: spiritually (i. e.) 
either by the spirit of man (not soul: ψυχή) 
quickened and filled by the Spirit of God, or in a 
spiritual manner, so that the Holy Spirit, whose 
are the things to be judged of, both asto form and 
substance, directs likewise in the judgment of 
them by His illuminating grace. In either case, 
the sense is essentially the same, although the 
latter comports better with the use of the word 
“spirit” in the context, [While it is the office 
of the Spirit to take of the things of Christ and 
show them unto us, it is His also to purge the 
mental yision so that it can see theeobjects pre- 
sented, for the eye of the natural man is blinded 
by the god of this world, and to him, however 
presented, the Gospel is hidden. Hence the mani- 
festation towards the man must be supplemented 
by a change in him, rendering him spiritually 
minded, and so producing ‘‘a congeniality be- 
tween the perceiver and the thing perceived.” ] 
Ver. 15. Presentsacontrast._But the spiritual 
man. ἴ. 6. he who, in conformity with the image 
of God (Col. iii. 10), has been renewed to an exist- 
ence in the Spirit, Who, in turn lives in him as 
his life and to a constant exercise of his power 
in the strength of the Spirit; in other words, he who 
has the Spirit as rule, guidance and might (Beck, 
Scelenl. S. 35 ff.); judgeth of all the things— 
τὰ πάντα [see Crit. obs.] all the things. By 
these we are to understand in accordance with 
the context, at least for the most part, or pre- 
eminently the things of the Spirit which the na- 
tural man is not in a condition to judge of. This 
reference is indicated yet more distinctly by the 
article τά : the [if genuine]. Besides the saying 
of Beck (Lehrwiss 5. 210) here holds good. 
«Only by being made spiritual is a man capaci- 
tated for the apprehension of spiritual objects. 
Such as God and Divine things, and only by the 
energy thus obtained is he able critically to test, 
and spiritually to govern all the remaining por- 
tion of his being as something inferior and sub- 
servient to the Spirit.” So also Meyer (ed. 3) 
[only giving the passage a much broader scope, 
since he refers the ‘‘all things’? not simply to 
those of the Spirit, but includes under it ‘‘all 





63 


objects which come within the sphere of his 
judgment”’]. “On all this can the spirituai 
man pass a correct estimate by means of a judg- 
ment enlightened and controlled by the Holy 
Ghost.” [In illustration of this, Meyer alludes 
to instances of Paul’s nice spiritual discrimina- 
tion, exhibited ‘‘in matters not belonging to doc- 
trine, and under the most varied conditions, e. g. 
in his wise improvement of circumstances amid 
persecutions and prosecutions, and during his 
last voyage, eteg also in his judgments respecting 
marriage cases, judicial causes, slavery, and the 
like; in all which he understood how to place 
every thing under the level of a higher spiritual 
point of view with wonderful clearness, certainty 
and impartiality; also in his estimate of different 
personages, etc.” But it may be fairly ques~ 
tioned whether Meyer does not here go beyond 
the proper scope of the passage. The object in 
view throughout the whole of it is a Divinely 
revealed spiritual ‘‘ wisdom,” which transcended 
the apprehension of ‘‘the natural man;” and it 
is not easy to see how affairs altogether pruden- 
tial could be brought into the account]. The 
acceptation of tavra as Acc, Sing. Mase. is 
against the previous context (see Meyer).—But 
he himself is judged of by noman.—Thepre- 
vious clause leads us to supply here, ‘‘ who is not 
spiritual.” For such as these the position of the 
spiritual man is too high. They cannot compre- 
hend the inner life, or pronounce suitable judg- 
ment upon it. ‘‘ Undoubtedly Paul said this with 
special allusion to such in the Corinthian Church 
as took the liberty of criticising him.”” NEANDER. 
Of course what is affirmed in this verse of the 
spiritual in general, must in particular cases be 
limited according to the measure and degree of 
perfection attained in the spiritual life (comp. 
Calvin and Osiander). One proof of the sense 
perverting exegesis of the Romish Church may 
be seen in their reference of this passage to the 
hierarchy and itsjudicial office in doubtful ques- 
tions (Corn. a Lapide, Estius). 

Ver. 16. Proof of the foregoing.—For who 
hath known the mind of the Lord, that 
he may instruct him ?—The question is taken 
from Is. xl. 18: according to the lxx., with the 
omission of the words καὶ τίς σύμβουλος αὐτοῦ 
ἐγένετο ‘and who hath become his counsellor,” 
which come in between the words “Lord” and 
“that.” The ‘“‘mind of the Lord” is here iden- 
tical with ‘‘the mind of Christ” in the following 
clause. We might, indeed, on looking at the 
passage in Isaiah, refer it to God; but since the 
words are introduced freely without a formula 
of citation, there is no necessity for this, and the 
identification of them with ‘the mind of Christ,” 
is more in accordance with the course of thought. 
The νοῦς, mind, is the spirit as the source of 
thoughts, counsels, plans. The spirit, not how- 
ever, as shut up within itself, but, so far as what 
is contained therein, is imparted and operates 
abroad. Hence it is not absolutely the same as 
πνεῦμα, spirit (as Billroth and Neander). [‘*This 
is rather the substratum of the vovc,—mind, and 
which being imparted to the man, makes his 
mind one with the mind of Christ.”” MryEr]. Ὃς 
συμβιβάσει --- ὥστε συμβιβάζειν [Buttmann, 3 
148,1., or Kiihner 3 834,2]. Συμβιβάζειν, to bring 
together, metaphorically, to put one’s self to rights, ts 


64 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





make oneself intelligible; and hence transitively, 
to prove, to instruct; elsewhere with τὰ, in the 
Hellenic idiom, also with a personal object; io 
teach some one, [This use of the word, Alford 
says belongs to the lxx; in the New Testament 
it means to conclude, to prove, to confirm]. The 
object in this case is not any spiritual truth, but 
the Lord,— but we have the mind of 
Christ.—[‘‘ We,” the Apostles, himself included, 
and in the view of his issue with the Church, 
perhaps emphasized. Of course other spiritual 
persons are not excluded, but they are not now 
brought into the account]. Hence, ἔγομεν, 
not—perspectum habemus. The word denotes that 
inward possession which is founded upon commu- 
nion with Christ, upon haying ‘put on Christ” 
(Gal. iii. 27).—The thought now brought outis this, 
the judgment of the spiritual man on the part of 
him who is not spiritual, would require such a 
knowledge of the mind of the Lord as would quali- 
fy a person to instruct the Lord Himself, since 
the persons who are to be judged are such as 
have the mind of Christ, inasmuch as His Spirit 
dwelling in them, and directing their thought, 
fashions them to His mind, and identifies their 
thinking with His thinking. [‘Syllogistically 
stated, the argument would stand thus: no one 
can instruct the Lord. We have the mind of the 
Lord. Therefore no one can instruct and judge 
us.’ Hopes. ] 

[Obs. We are now prepared to consider what 
this wisdom is, that is spoken of in this passage, 
according to the characteristics given by the 
Apostle. 1. It is a system of objective truth ana- 
logous to that taught by the Greek philosophers, 
and destined to supplant it: the true σοφία sent 
to supersede the false. 2. It is one that can be 
advantageously taught only to persons who by a 
practical faith in the rudimental facts of Chris- 
tianity, have made some advances in the Divine 
life. 3. It is a wisdom beyond the reach of hu- 
man reason or conjecture to discover—a verita- 
ble mystery preserved in God’s keeping until He 
should choose to make it known. 4. It is one 
which has been revealed by the Holy Spirit out 
of the depths of the Godhead; hence 5. It must 
comprise such things as are found there, and 
carry the mark of the Divine personality, viz.: 
the nature, attributes, and constitution of the 
Divine Being, His plans and purposes as Creator, 
His laws as the Supreme Ruler, His aims and 
methods, and decrees, and works as Redeemer; 
all these more particularly as bearing upon man, 
and shedding light upon his condition and des- 
tiny. And these are truths both ontological and 
ethical; truths for the intellect and moral sense 
at once; truths spiritual and eternal in their 
highest and broadest sense, 6. The forms in 
which this wisdom is communicated, are also 
Divinely cast. They are they the words and 
illustrations suggested to the minds of the Apos- 
tles by the Holy Ghost, who inspired them, and 
which must ever constitute the best statements 
of this wisdom. It is a wisdom whose truth and 
excellence are not directly obvious to the natural 
man. In order to discern intuitively its force 
and beauty, and to perceive its Divine character, 
there is required the spiritual eye that is con- 
formed to the light of the glory of God as it 
shines in the face of Jesus Christ, and can by 





direct vision recognize its truth and heavenly 
source. | 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1. There is and must be a Divine philosophy is 
Christianity. The historical facts on which the 
Gospel rests embody living and eternal truths, 
which it is the life and joy of the spiritual man 
to contemplate and explore. In Jesus, the Son 
of man, there is incarnated the Word of God the 
Logos, from whom emanate all those Divine ar- 
chetypal ideas which inform and regulate the 
whole created universe. By Him all things con- 
sist. His province it is also, as the Son of God, 
the Father’s express image, to reveal that Father 
in the glory of His perfections, in His laws, pur- 
poses and workings, and thus to exhibit the 
principles on which the world is governed. 
Moreover, as the Son of Man, it is His office te 
show what man properly is in his true ideal, and 
what are the problems of his destiny. Still fur- 
ther, as the Son of God and the Son of man com- 
bined to constitute the mediatorial King, He be- 
comes the centre of all human history, the Head 
of that kingdom with reference to which all 
things in the world are controlled and governed. 
Christianity, therefore, carries in itself the sub- 
stance of all sound theology, and anthropology, 
and ethics, and historical science. Jesus Him- 
self being the absolute Truth and Life, in Him 
there must be hid all the treasures of wisdom 
and knowledge, and these treasures it will be 
the province of an enlightened intelligence to ex- 
plore, and bring forth, and make known to the 
apprehension of mankind as that which is alone 
worthy of study and fitted to nourish alike the 
mind and heart. Thus it will be found in the end 
that the researches of right reason are directly in 
the line of faith’s leading—that the scheme of 
Christianity as set forth in the doctrines of the 
Gospel is in accordance with true science—yea, 
its very substance—and that ‘‘religion passes 
out of the ken of reason only when the eye of 
reason has reached its horizon, and that faith is 
but its continuation,” revealing to the devout 
worshipper the things which eye hath not seen, 
nor ear heard, nor hath entered into the heart of 
man to conceive]. 

[2. This Divine philosophy is distinctly appre- 
hended only by a renewed. sanctified intelligence. 
Here life and light coincide. We believe in 
order that we may understand, and experience 
becomes the only fit guide and teacher. Sin 


and the remains of sin prove a disqualifica- 


tion for knowledge and beget folly. Hence it is 
that the communication of this Divine wisdom is 
suited only to such as have made attainments in 
piety, and must be measured out in proportion 
to their attainments by a wise economy. Christ 
being our light, so far as He is our life, it must 
follow] that with the unfolding of this new life in 
us, and to the degree in which the principle of 
this life, even the Divine Spirit, mortifies the 
works of the flesh and breaks down our narrow~ 
minded selfishness, and clears our intelligence of 
all prejudices, and emancipates us from human 
authorities, and from our self-complacency, and 
from our delight in whatsoever flatters and 
pleases self, will this Divine wisdom dawn with 


— a «0 


CHAP. II. 6-16. 65 





ever-growing clearness upon our apprehensions, 
and our understanding of God’s thoughts and 
ways become enlarged, and our susceptibility for 
still further disclosures be increased. If on the 
awakened conscience of the sinner there arises 
at the start the light of Gud’s pardoning and re- 
storing grace beaming from the person of Christ 
evidently crucified before his eyes, and under its 
radiance he sees the follies of the past and the 
obligations of the future, and learns his indebt- 
edness to redeeming love, and experiences its 
saving and gladdening influences, and feels in 
himself the quickening of a new and higher 
principle with all its uplifting powers and emo- 
tions, then in™all this there will be laid the foun- 
dation of a knowledge of Christ, and what He is, 
and what is the nature of the life that proceeds 
from Him, to which each day’s experience and 
reflection will constantly contribute. As his 
piety matures, the more he will come to under- 
stand something of the riches that are to be found 
in Christ—of His relations to the Godhead as the 
Eternal and Only-Begotten of the Father—of His 
relations to humanity as its Prince and Head— 
of the atonement founded upon the intimate union 
of His two natures—of the method and means by 
which His redeeming work was begun and is 
carried on and will be perfected at last—of the 
operations of the Holy Spirit in the instrumen- 
talities of the Gospel—of the gifts of grace—of 
the foundation and increase of the Church—of 
God’s superintendence over the race in guiding 
it to a participation in the blessings of his salva- 
tion—of the way in which these things condition 
each other, and how they all come to rest upon 
the decree of the all-wise and merciful God which 
infinitely exceeds all human imaginings, and to 
the realization of which the whole history of the 
race in all its main branches, both before and af- 
ter Christ, must tend—of the manner in which 
God will consummate His redeeming work, both 
in its direct progress and in its remoter connection 
with what precedes, and in its resemblances to 
the work of creation (1 Cor. xv.), and finally of 
the immanent relations of the Godhead which lie 
at the foundation of this whole process. These 
are some of the truths which will gradually un- 
fold their glorious meanings upon the mind of 
the growing Christian, making his path shine 
brighter and brighter until the perfect day. Mere 
beginners cannot be expected to comprehend 
them. They transcend the apprehension even of 
the most distinguished sages of the world, and 
range beyond the scope of man’s natural experi- 
ence and observation—yea, beyond the flights of 
human imagination and hope. But to the sincere 
believer they are made known with ever greater 
clearness through the illumination of the Holy 
Spirit. 

8, The office of the Holy Spirit as the revealer 
rests upon essential distinctions in the being of God. 
His external operations and His indwelling in 
the hearts of men are owing to an earlier and 
independent existence in the Godhead, by virtue 
of which He is called ‘the Spirit of God” in a 
manner analogous to ‘‘the spirit of man which is 
in man.” Hence he must be supposed to exist 
in God not merely as a power or an attribute, 
but as an essential life-factor in the Divine nature, 
maintaining at the same time that independence 


4 








which is already seen to follow from His inde- 
pendent activity abroad, and from the perfection 
of the Divine nature. He 1s (‘od’s proper self, as 
certainly as man’s spirit is his own self; yet not 
however the entire God, just as the spirit of man 
is not the entire man. More exactly defined in 
the light of ver. 11, He is God as looking through 
and recognizing Himself, even as we may define 
the. Logos to be God imaging and expressing 
Himself objectively. And if the Divine fiat 
which creates life abroad is, when contemplated 
inwardly as the Logos, a self-subsistent and 
creative Life, so is the Divine cognition which 
illuminates and creates truth abroad—when con- 
templated inwardly as Spirit, an independent and 
creative truth or light. God’s being and begetting 
as Spirit, 7. ¢., the Spirit ἐπ God and the Spirit 
from God, is Truth—is the Light and the Father of 
Lights. On the ground of these essential dis- 
tinctions within the being of God, there is as- 
cribed to the Spirit in ver. 18 a vision and a 
knowledge, which not only penetrates all God’s 
works in their profoundest depths, and comprises 
in its scope all creaturely perception and all the 
mysteries of the kingdom of God (ver. 9), but 
also comprehends the inmost secrets of the Di- 
vine personality and most hidden attributes of 
God’s own self. And precisely because He is 
this inwardly illuminated inmost self of God, and 
the all-penetrating vision of God, is He the Truth. 
Spirit is God (Jno. iv. 24) as being a per- 
sonality which is in itself invisible, but which is 
conscious of itself in the whole circumference of 
its being and which thoroughly discerns and re- 
veals every thing external to itself. And the 
Lord is that Spirit, in so far as He taketh away 
the veil from the heart and discloses His glory 
unto the believer, from one degree of splendor 
unto another, until the fulness of His light shines 
upon them (2 Cor. iii. 17 ff; cf. iv. 6).” Ac- 
cordingly inasmuch as God is throughout trans- 
parent to Himself, and manifest in His own pecu- 
liar and hidden self, shining through every 
thing, and glorifying all who are devoted to Him 
in Himself, He is Light in Himself, Light through 
Himself on all abroad, and Light to Himself. 
This is the inward significance of the Divine: 
Spirit, and such is He in godlike self-subsistence 
as the living and creative truth,” etc. (Beck,. 
Lehre., S. 103 ff.). 

4, While the psychical (ψυχικός) man imprisoned: 
as he is in his own natural selfishness, living and. 
moving ever outside of the sphere of God’s en- 
lightening Spirit, has no sense to receive the 
Divine spiritual communications so that they all 
appear to him irrational and absurd, the spiritual: 
(πνευματικός) man, who has received the Spirit 
of God and is controlled by him, carries in him- 
self a standard for determining that which is of the: 
Spirit; so that he is able to estimate it, both. 
according to its substance and its form of expres-- 
sion, and is therefore qualified to judge of every-- 
thing which comes within his sphere, by this the 
highest measure of all true worth. But he him. 
self is exalted above the judgment of the un. 
spiritual. Persons of this sort are capable of 
comprehending or instructing him so far as he is 
governed in his conduct by the Divine spirit, 
about as little as they are in condition to know 
the mind of Christ, which the spiritual man hath,. 


66 





and so to instruct Christ Himself. But the 
spiritual man judgeth of all things, because he 
hath received the anointing of the Holy One, 
even Christ, and knoweth all things (1 John ii. 
21, 22). These are they who are ‘taught of 
God.” (ϑεοδίδακτοι, Jno. vi. 45.) This exalted 
state is maintained in the same manner in which 
itis won, in true, humble self-denial, in poverty 
of spirit, in steadfast, determined mortification of 
all selfish desires and unrestrained devotion to 
do what is good and wise, and in that simple- 
hearted abandonment which allows the Spirit of 
God to work in the heart, to will and to do of 
his own good pleasure. So far as these qualities 
fail, and self is suffered to hold sway, the man is 
betrayed into spiritual pride and into gross 
errors which arise from commingling and con- 
founding what is human with what is Divine. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


1. Rieger: The great distinction between the 
wisdom of this world and the wisdom of God.—1. a. 
The former changes its opinions and principles 
well nigh faster than its fashions. ὃ. It is am- 
bitious to give the tone to that which shall be 
esteemed proper and conducive to the public 
good, and to fill every sphere with its own taste 
and judgment so as to be in favor with the 
princes of this world. c. But, alas! those to 
whom it so devotes itself soon fade and pass 
away but too apparently. The greater part of 
them outlive their own credit for wisdom, and 
a false garnish of their youth is soon succeeded 
by the lustrelessness of an old age which is all the 
more wretched from the contrast. 2. a. The 
hidden wisdom of God emerges out of eternity, 
and is on this account liable to no change. 3. 
Its benefits also stretch onward into eternity, and 
when the work of redemption shall be completed 
it will be found in glory long after the fashion of 
this world has utterly vanished. c. Its instruc- 
tion flows with such purity that only those who 
lay the foundation for it in the fear of God are 
introduced therein, step by step, along the path 
of obedience. d. Against its demands the heart 
of man is so apt to be hardened that it is a rare 
thing for one of the princes of this world to 
attain unto the knowledge of it (vv. 6-8). 

2. The mystery of the Divine wisdom.—What is 
here held up to faith transcends the sight and 
hearing, the knowledge and understanding of 
men (6. g.) the manifestation of the Son of God in 
this world, the mysteries of the kingdom of 
heaven declared by Him, His sufferings, death, 
and resurrection, the setting up of His Church 
through the power of the Holy Spirit dispensed 
in such lowly vessels, the ways and judgments of 
God with His people on earth hitherto and the 
numerous humiliations of the cross which yet 
issue in the clearer victory of the truth. Nothing 
of all this could have entered the heart of man, 
had it not been first declared by the Son, who is 
in the bosom of the Father, and afterwards more 
fully disclosed by the Spirit (ver. 9). 

8. The revelation through the Spirit of God.—1. 
Its indispensableness to the knowledge of God, 
because God is alone, and is known only to Him- 
self, therefore less capable of being ‘searched 
out” than men are by each other, since they 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


:--ΡΟ΄ῦ-. 


j 
possess ἃ common nature. 2. Its sufficiency; — 


what the Spirit searches out and can consequently 
impart is perfectly substantiated, since He a 
certainly belongs to the being of God as our 
spirit belongs to our human nature, and knows 
every thing respecting God with as much cer- 
tainty as our consciousness reports to us what is 
inus. 38. Its contents and operation; what God 
has in mercy ordained respecting us, the reason 
why He has made us His children, and what He 
prepared for us for all eternity, this we learn 
from the Spirit of God. He teaches it; He 
awakens also our desires for it; He works faith 
in us, and He establishes and quiets the heart in 
this knowledge (vv. 10-12). 

4. The preaching that is acceptable to God.—a. 
Ts one that follows the lead of the Spirit, and ὃ. 
It is attainable by the diligent perusal of the 
words of the Apostle, learned from the Holy 
Ghost, by inquiring into their meaning, and also 
by submitting our hearts and minds‘to the dis- 
cipline and guidance of the Spirit. In other 
respects at the same time we are not to omit re- 
flection upon the suitable construction of the 
discourse and the right use of all human aids, 
yet aiming, however, always to keep aloof from 
all that is purely our own, or is prized by the 
world, or is extravagant in diction, and to bring 
forth whatever is impressive and soberly con- 
sidered, according as the Spirit of God has ex- 
pressed it to us in the Scriptures. c. But even 
for this reason, can the true preacher not expect 
to please every person; for in preaching spiri- 
tual doctrines he is obliged to direct his attention 
largely to the spiritually-minded, who are assisted 
in the apprehension of his message by the help 
of the Spirit working in them also (ver. 18). . 

5. The natural man neither receives nor appre- 
hends what the Holy Spirit teaches in the Gospel.— 
Such is every person who rests in his own na- 
tural powers and has not bowed his heart to the 
influences of the Holy Ghost, since in his love of 
self he trusts too much to his own understanding, 
whose insight and evidence he over-values, and 
is thereby betrayed into an aversion to Divine 
things. But such corruption is not simply a bond- 
age to carnal lusts. It is also a wisdom that is 
after the flesh (vv. 12,13); and the words of hu- 
man wisdom excite an opposition to the doctrines 
taught by the Spirit, as well as to the simplicity 
of preaching. But this has its degrees: a, strong 
prejudice even to the avowed rejection of Divine 
truths; ὁ, neglect of spiritual things, so as not 
to deem it worth while to lay aside prejudices 
and candidly to confer with any one in reference- 
to them; c, assent to the truth, but without any 
strong faith wrought by the Spirit of God to the 
entire change of mind, hence accompanied still 
by hostility to the light, and by an incapacity 
to judge spiritual things spiritually. 

6. The spiritual man: a, his ability to judge; 
b, his elevation above the judgment of others.— 
a, He who has been brought by the Spirit 
of God to the knowledge, faith and obedience 
of the truth, and daily learns, under Divine 
tuition, the things which are given us of 
God, judges everything which is presented to 
him appertaining to the knowledge and service 
of God, not indeed with entire infallibility, yet 
according to correct grounds. ὃ, But in this he 


} 


/ 


CHAP. II. 6-16. 


67 


Oe ee  τοΠροΠ' πΠΠπΠπΠΠΠΠΠπΠΠππΠΠ πτοΠΠ ν τ πΞ'Ρρ 0 ὉῦῦῸ π΄ .....ῦῦ.  Σ 


is neither subject to the judgment of any man, 
nor bound to allow himself to be governed by it. 
For with the force of the declaration, ‘‘ Who has 
known the mind of the Lord? but we have the 
mind of Christ,” he can swing himself clear of 
all human judgments and repose in that which 
Christ has revealed. But it must be remem- 
bered, that in order to be able properly to boast 
that we have the mind of Christ there must be in 
us daily communion with the word of God, an 
entire indifference to human glory, fervency in 
prayer, and a patient love towards others. O 
God, teach me by thy Spirit, for thus it is I live. 

7. SrarKke:—The longer and more truly a 
Christian serves God, the more spiritual wisdom 
he obtains (ver. 6). Christ and everything that 
is in and with Him, is an incomprehensible mys- 
tery; fail but to explore it, and thou art but a 
fool; but believe what is revealed to thee of it, 
and it is enough for thy salvation (ver.7). Won- 
der not that the greatest in the world, the most 
gifted, the wisest, do not only not accept Christ, 
but on the contrary altogether torture and cru- 
eify Him. They understand no better, and 
think themselves able by means of their reason 
to comprehend the faith and religion of Christ, 
just as they do everything else (ver. 8). The 
royal dignity of the children of God is shown in 
the fact, that they perceive and spiritually judge 
all things, especially the internal state of the 
godless, while they themselves are wholly un- 
known to the latter; and hence it is that they 
will one day become, as it were, occupants of the 
great judgment seat as Christ’s associate judges 
in the world’s assize (Lg.). Oh, how unqualified 
is the unconverted teacher for the office of the 
Spirit, especially for judging correctly of the 
true state of the souls of his hearers (Lange), 
(ver. 15). The mind of Christ is the mind of the 
Father and of the Holy Ghost, and it is revealed 
in the Scriptures. Whoever then wishes to know 
the mind of Christ need not climb on high and 
seek it from far (Rom. x. 7), but let him hold fast 
to the revealed word. There he will learn what 
God means and what he intends to do with us 
(ver. 16). 

8. Hepincer:—Listen how a man ought to 
preach: Not in the stilted phraseology of ro- 
mance, nor in the use of wretched wit; but he 
should utter the mysteries of God in the form of 
sound words (1 Tim. vi. 3), and as the Holy 
Ghost lays them to the heart and brings them to 
the tongue of His faithful servants (Matt. x. 20). 
(Ver. 13).—Is he that judges unregenerate? 
What better is he than a blind man undertaking 
to judge of colors? Is heregenerate? Then he 
has a mind akin to that he judges. And al- 
though opinions in reference to topics that are 
aside from Christ, the foundation (iii. 11), may 
be divided, yet will he pass no judgment on 
these contrary to love and mildness, much less 
set himself up to be the lord and judge of an- 
other’s faith, in an arrogant, unbecoming man- 
ner (ver. 15). 

9. Gossner:—It is not well to communicate 
everything to all. There are truths which can 
fitly be expressed only in certain circumstances 
and in certain degrees (ver. 6). Only to those 
who have come to the just consideration of their 
sin and misery will the Lamb of God, who taketh 








away the sins of the world, become the founda- 
tion and centre from which everything proceeds 
and to which everything returns (vv. 7,8). Best 
of all is it to preserve everything in a pure, still 
heart, and let there be for every pulse a thanks- 
giving and for every breath a song, until all 
come together at last, and we can praise our Re- 
deemer for everything with one accord in the 
right place and in society of the right persons 
(ver. 9). A glance into the deep things of God 
might awaken in us proud thoughts, as if it were 
possible for us to scan the Divine Majesty. But 
within this depth there is nothing else to be dis- 
covered but infinite love; that love whereby God 
condescended so low and stooped to commune 
with wicked, fallen, degraded humanity. These 
are the deepest depths and the most indescrib- 
able mysteries of the Godhead. This is what 
the natural man cannot understand—that God 
should make Himself so small. A glance into 
this mystery therefore does not elate, but it 
humbles (ver. 10). As we are obliged to learn 
men through men, so can we learn God only 
through God, or through His Spirit (ver. 11). 
The spirit of the world is at bottom the evil 
spirit, Satan, the god of this world, who has his 
seat in the hearts of the children of disobedience, 
and rules the world from thence. He must be 
expelled by the Spirit of God. He who has this 
Divine Spirit knows out of his own experience 
and inward observation what is given to him of 
God. He believes not at random, but what he 
believes that he knows, possesses, and enjoys (ver. 
12). If a preacher surrenders his whole heart 
and mind and conduct to God, he will become so 
possessed by the Holy Ghost that it will be ob- 
vious to all that the Spirit speaks through him 
(ver. 13). There are honorable people with 
whom we can converse on many truths of Chris- 
tianity, such as the omnipresence of God, etc., 
and they will hear and understand gladly. But 
as soon as we speak a word concerning the 
Saviour and His meritorious sufferings and 
death, then they say: “ΑΒ, that I don’t under- 
stand; that is too high for me.”’ This doctrine 
does not suit one who has not the Holy Spirit. 
To the old man in us it is only foolishness (ver. 
14). If we ‘‘have the mind of Christ,” think as 
He thinks, will as He wills, put all matters be- 
fore us as He puts them, then will it be granted 
us to understand the mysteries of the kingdom 
of God (ver. 16). 

9. Heusner:—The man who is enlightened 
by the Spirit is able to estimate and judge all 
things, even the moral worth of the principles 
and acts of the unconverted, and the vanity of 
the earthly mind with its pursuits, because he 
knows what sin is from his own experience, and 
has torn himself loose from it, and because in 
the knowledge of the will of God, the absolute 
Good, he has a standard to measure everything 
else according to its real value (ver. 15). 

10. On vy. 10-12. Schleier. Serm. 5th coll. Vol. 
2d. From what the Apostle has said of the in- 
most nature and origin of the Spirit of God, it 
follows 1. that the operations of the Spirit are 
unique in their kind; 2. that every thing which 
comes to us from the Spirit is perfectly certain 
and reliable; 3. that it is amply sufficient for 
all our spiritual needs. On1. To all othe Ltt 


68 





ters the world arouses us by means of our com- 
mon understanding; but to ‘‘search the deep 
things of God,” and to ery ‘‘Abba Father,” this 
is youchsafed to us only by the Spirit when He 
descends into our spirits. On 2, Since the 
knowledge imparted by the Spirit, respecting 
what is in God is as eternal and unchanging as 
the Spirit of God Himself, the conviction thus 
obtained that ‘“‘God is Love” becomes also the 
deepest and most reliable truth of our existence, 
etc. On 8. There is nothing wanting to our 
most blessed communion with God,—if only the 
Holy Spirit reveal to us the love of God as the 
innermost depth of his nature,—if only we are 
made to see that benevolent purpose of God, 
which has been actuating his paternal heart to- 
wards the race from the beginning,—if only it 
become evident to us that all the wounds of our 
nature may be healed through the fulness of the 
Godhead which dwells in Christ as He has be- 
come partaker of our nature,—and if only 
through Him the Spirit of God, who is poured 
out upon all who believe in Christ as a quicken- 
ing and strengthening power, glorifies the Sa- 
viour in their view and causes them to realize 
the presence of Christ in Him. 

11. [We must be cautious not to pervert these 
statements into arguments for the disparage- 
ment of human reason and learning in the mat- 
ters of religion. See this point argued in ex- 
tenso by Richard Hooker (III. viii. 4-11). So 
Wordsworth]. 

12. [THotvuck. vers. 6-13. Apostolic Preach- 
ing. 1. Its source—derived: a. not from” the 
teaching of men, but ὁ. from the revelation of the 
Divine Spirit. II. Its form: a. not a demonstra- 
tion of the human understanding, but a witness of 
the Divine Spirit; 6. not the product of an ac- 
quired eloquence, but the offspring of a Divine 
necessity. Vers. 12-14. Apostolic preaching. 1. 
It proceeds out of the Spirit of God in the 
preacher. II. It addresses itself to the Spirit 
of God in the hearer.—R. Sourn. Ver. 7. 
Christianity mysterious,* and the wisdom of God in 








(* An evident misapprehension of the word “mystery,” 
as used in the text.) 











THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





making it so. I. The Gospel is the wisdom of 
God. IL. It is this wisdom in a mystery. The 
reasons of the mystery: a. the nature and qual 
ity of the things treated of, being surpassingly 
great, spiritual and strange ; ὁ. the ends designed 
with relation to their influence on the mind in 
impressing with awe and reverence, and hum- 
bling pride, and engaging our closer search, and 
reserving fuller knowledge as a source of bless- 
edness hereafter. Inferences: 1. The reasona- 
bleness of relying on the judgment of the Church 
and on spiritual teachers. The unreasonableness 
of making intelligibleness the measure of faith. 
3. The vanity and presumption of pretending to 
clear up all mysteries in religionJ. Sprn- 
cer: Ver. 7. Wisdom of God in mystery.* I. The 
matter of mysteriousness which the Apos- 
tle had in mind. Christ slain for us. 11. This 
mysteriousness is wisdom, as being what might 
be expected in accordance with other mysteries, 
such as: a. Sin: ὁ. Incarnation; 6. Christ’s per- 
son and history; d. The mode of God’s treatment 
of Christ; e. The mode of the believer's restora- 
tion to God.—J. Barrow: Ver. 6. The Lxcellency 
of the Christian Religion as suited for ‘the per- 
fect:’’ 1, in the character it gives of God; 2, in 
the description it gives of man; 3, in the rule it 
prescribes; 4, in the service it appoints; 5, in 
the living example it affords; 6, in the solid 
grounds it gives us to build on; 7, in the help it 
affords; 8, in the way it satisfies conscience; 9, 
in the simplicity of its communication.—F. W. 
Rozpertson: Vers. 9, 10. God’s Revelation of 
heaven. 1. Inability of the lower parts of human 
nature, the natural man, to apprehend the higher 
truth: a. ‘‘Eye hath not seen ’’—not by sensa- 
tion; ὁ. ‘‘ Ear hath not. heard ”’—not by hearing; 
6. ‘‘Neither have entered the heart’’—not by im- 
agination or affection. II. The Nature and Laws of 
Revelation: a, by a Spirit to a spirit; 5, on the 
condition of Love.—N. Emmons: Ver. 12. The 
peculiar spirit of Christians. II. Describe the 
Spirit. II. Show the peculiar knowledge it 
gives. 


[* A mistake, as above.] 


IV. THE UNFITNESS OF THE CORINTHIANS TO RECEIVE TRUE WISDOM. 


Cuaprer III. 1-4. 


Anp I, [I also"] brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto 


2 carnal, [fleshy] even as unto babes in Christ. 


I have fed you with milk, and [om. 


and*] not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither [nay, not even*] yet 


3 now are ye able. 


For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you enyying, and 


4 strife, and divisions, [om. divisions®] are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while 
one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal [men*]? 


1 Ver. 1—The Rec. has καὶ ἐγώ. but with the far better and preponderant authorities A. B. 0. D. B. F. G. Cod. Sin, 
Lach. and Tisch. read κἀγώ [which, as Words. says, “ gives less prominence to the L., and accords more with the Apostle’s 


humility ”’}. 


CHAP. III. 1-4. 





69 





2 Ver. 1.—The Rec. has σαρκικοῖς according to ver. 3, where a preponderance of authorities declares for σαρκικοί, and 
only a few, governed by the original reading in ver. 1, have σάρκινοι. Here as in Rom. vii. 14; Heb. vii. 16 we must read 


according to best authorities σαρκίνοις. 


[So A. B. C. Ὁ. Cod. Sin.—followed_ by Gries., Lach., Tisch., Words., Alf., etc.]. 


3 Ver. 2—The καὶ, according to the best manuscripts [A. B. C. Cod. Sin. ], is rejected by the great majority of transla- 


tors and by the old church fathers. 


4 Ver. 2.—The Rec. οὔτε instead of οὐδέ is feebly supported and verbally incorrect. 
5 Ver. 3.—Kai διχοστασίαι is wanting in good authorities, A. B.[C. Cod. Sin.] and in the majority of versions and 


church fathers. Its omission is not to be explained. 


tains 10]. 


ὃ Ver. 4.—Rec. οὐχὶ σαρκικοὶ ἐστε. [Instead read οὐκ ἄνθρωποί ἐστε 


Probably inserted as a gloss from Gal. νυ. 20. [Wordsworth re- 


So A. B. C. Cod. Sin. Alf., Stanley, Lach., Tisch., 


etc.] οὐκ is better attested than οὐχὶ and ἄνθρωποι still better. The Rec. reading is probably taken from ver. 3. 


; 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


4 

Ver. 1. As inchap. ii. 1,so here Paul turns from 
his more general exposition to the consideration 
of his own ministry at Corinth. The points of 
connection are furnished in ii. 6, 14. The com- 
munication of wisdom on the part of the Apos- 
tles belonged only to the sphere of the perfect, of 
the spiritual; it could not be extended to those 
who were natural psychical (Seelische) and un- 
receptive of that which was of the Spirit. As 
every other person must have done therefore, I 
also was obliged to treat you as persons of the 
latter class:—was not able to speak unto 
you as unto spiritual, but as unto (merely) 
fleshy (persons), as unto babes in Christ.— 
Instead of ψυχικός, natural, lit. psychical, Ger. 
seelisch, he now uses σάρκινος and σαρκικός, fleshy 
and fleshly or carnal, the ordinary antithesis to 
πνευματικός, spiritual. The sense, however, is 
not changed by this, for the natural or psychi- 
cal man is also at the same time a ‘‘fleshy” and 
‘carnal’? man (comp. ii. 14), and we can neither 
say, with Bengel, that these latter expressions 
are milder, nor with Riickert, that they denote 
simple weakness, while the former implies hos- 
tile opposition; nor with Theophy. that they are 
stronger epithets than ‘‘ psychical,” nor that the 
latter refers to the intelligence, while the former 
apply to the moral side of human nature, such 
as the desire and passions. Meyer 2d ed., 
«ἐψυχικός denotes the category to which σαρκινός 
and σαρκικός belong.” 3d ed., ““ψυχικός: one who 
stands outside of the influence of the Spirit, who 
either has not received Him at all, or has been 
again deserted by Him.”’ Such a person is also 
σαρκικός. But not every σαρκικός as such is still 
a ψυχικός, because a σαρκικός may be also one who 
experienced the influences of the Spirit, but is 
not sufficiently actuated by his enlightening and 
sanctifying power to overcome the hostile power 
of the flesh; he still thinks, feels, judges, acts 
κατὰ σάρκα (according to the flesh). ‘‘He is here 
not speaking of Christians as distinguished from 
the world, but of one class of Christians as dis- 
tinguished from another.” Hopau.—Again it is 
a question how odpkivoc, fleshy, and σαρκικός, 
fleshly, stand related to each other. The for- 
mer elsewhere is used to denote made of the 
flesh, carneous. [Barytones in ἐνος denote the 
material of whichathing is made, λίϑενος of stone, 
ξύλινος of wood, etc.]. The LXX. employs it to 
signify partly the earthliness and weakness of 
man in contrast with God (2 Chron. xxxii. 8), 
and partly what is tender and easily impressed 
in contrast with what is hard and stony (Ez. xi. 
19; xxxvi. 26. In like manner it occurs in 2 
Cor. iii. 3). But σαρκικός is used in the New 
Testament, and afterwards by the church fathers, 
to designate the disposition and character as 





contrasted with πνευματικός. [Denominatives in 
κός express that which pertains to the noun from 
which they are derived, and are like our adjec- 
tives ending in dy]. Bleek in Heb. vii. 16 is of 
the opinion that in the first introduction of these 
terms they were used alike,-and that it was not 
until later that the ordinary ethical signification 
was limited to the form σαρκικός which occurs 
but rarely in the classics. Meyer on the con- 
trary sharply distinguishes. According-to him 
σάρκινος designates the unspiritual state of na- 
ture which the Corinthians still had in their 
early Christian minority, inasmuch as the Holy 
Spirit had as yet changed their character so 
slightly that they appeared as if consisting of 
men flesh still. But σαρκικός expresses a later 
ascendancy of the hostile material nature over 
the divine principle of which they had been made 
partakers by progressive instruction. And it is 
the latter which, as he thinks, the Apostle makes 
the ground of his rebuke. In so far, however, 
as both epithets are of kindred signification, he 
could, notwithstanding the distinction between 
them, affirm, ‘‘for ye are yet carnal.” So Meyer. 
The distinction between an intellectual weakness 
and narrow-mindedness in the first beginnings 
of Christianity (to which also the parallel ex- 
pression νηπίοις, babes, refers), and a moral im- 
purity and perverseness manifesting itself in the 
progress of Christian development, and involving 
also an intellectual incapacity for a true heavenly 
wisdom, is a distinction fully justifiable and con- 
sonant with the use of the terms σαρκικός and 
σάρκινος by the Apostle elsewhere. But that the 
term σαρκίνοις is to be here understood relatively, 
and as not denoting an entire lack of the πνεῦμα 
is clearly indicated by the phrase ‘‘as unto babes 
in Christ.’’ The time here referred to is that 
when they had just begun to receive Christian 
instruction, and were but recently admitted into 
fellowship with Christ by faith and baptism, and 
so become the children of God. They were of 
course then wholly immature and spiritually de- 
pendent, so that their conduct did not indicate 
the full impress of the Spirit. Their con- 
scious will, the I, was still fettered by carnal 
and selfish habits, and their ability to compre- 
hend the deever grounds and relations of Chris- 
tian truth was yet undeveloped. In short the 
allusion is to that crudeness which is seen in 
children. [And does not the word ‘fleshy,” 
seeing that the Apostle had in mind the image 
of babyhood, also clearly refer to the appearance 
of the babe also—a little lump seemingly of mere 
flesh, as yet evincing but little signs of mind or 
conscience, although containing these elements 
in the germ? One can hardly avoid discovering 
here one reason of the use of the word ‘‘fleshy ” 
instead of fleshly, which is an opprobious epithet, 
applicable only to later years. That mere ani- 
malness, which is one of the beauties of the babe, 


70 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a A AS: a A aa a a a ἀπτ΄-πτττ πὐπ πὐ πῶσ -- 
becomes deformity and a disgrace in an adult. ; good sense, zeal, emulation, and in a bad one, 


Hence the change of terms when the Apostle comes 
to speak of their after condition. They were 
σάρκινοι at first, but not developing their spiritu- 
ality they become σαρκικόι]. That fondness for 
showy eloquence which was natural at the first 
passed over into the vanity and corruption of an 
egotistical partisanship, and so instead of at- 
taining progressively a confirmed Christian cha- 
racter, they become carnal. In like manner the 
Rabbins also speak of little ones and sucklings. 
Schoettgen in loco. Wetstein 1 Pet. ii. 2; Matth. 
x. 42. Οη νηπίοις comp. xiv. 20; Heb. v. 18; 
otherwise Matth. xi. 25. 

Ver. 2. The figure introduced in the previous 
verse is still further carried out.—I gave you 
milk to drink.—That is, he gave them nourish- 
ment suited to their age. To the beginners in the 
Divine life, He imparted such instruction as was 
easy to be understood, the rudiments of Chris- 
tian knowledge (Heb. vi. 1), not strong meat 
such as adults only could digest, not the deeper 
truths of wisdom, which only those who had 
advanced in religious experience could properly 
receive, ii. 6 ff.—not meat.—This is connected 
to the foregoing in the way of a zeugma. [Winer, 
ἢ lxvi.c.]. Instead of ἐπότισα, have given to drink, 
which can only be asserted of the ‘‘milk,” and 
not of the ‘*meat,’ some other verb, such as 
ἔδωκα, have given, is to be supplied. ‘The dis- 
tinction between ‘milk’ and ‘meat’ can lie 
only in the formal treatment of the same funda- 
mental truth.” Neanper. ‘To refer the distine- 
tion here to the subject-matter of the preaching, 
is required neither by the figure used, nor by the 
connection.” Bureer. [‘* The same truth in one 
form is milk, in another form, strong meat.” 
Hover. ‘Christ is milk for babes, and strong 
meat for men.” Catvin]. The reason of the 
above preceience was,—for ye were not as 
yet able to bear it.—The time here referred 
to was the commencement of his ministry, and 
that of their first conversion, and the verb ἐδύ- 
νασϑε, able is to be taken in an absolute sense, 
as it is used also in the classics, ‘ye were not 
strong or capable enough.”” Mreyer.—nay, nor 
yet now are ye able.—The ἀλλά [which we 
render ‘*nay”’], is climacteric: not only were ye 
unable, but indeed ye are so still.” It might ap- 
pear inconsistent with this declaration that Paul 
proceeded in the xv. to expound to them the doc- 
trine of the resurrection which certainly is strong 
meat rather than milk; but there was a special 
demand for such an exposition, which saved him 
from the charge of contradicting himself. 

Ver. 8. [Assigns the reason of the inability. 
—For ye are yet carnal—here we have cap- 
κικόι---ποῖ σάρκινοι, as the word of censure appli- 
cable only to their advanced stage, and showing 
that though they had been Christians for a long 
time, they had yet the fleshiness of children upon 
them, now become fleshliness. The proof of 
this]—for whereas there is among you en- 
vying, and strife, and divisions [?], are ye 
not carnal, and walk according to man ?— 
Here he refers back to what was said in i. 10, ff. 
In Gal. y. 20 he also counts these same things as 
among the works of the flesh, comp. likewise 
Rom. xiii. 13. Ζῆλος, envying; in classic as 
well as in Hellenic usage, this word occurs in a 











Jealousy, envy. Here it signifies partisan rivalry, 
Out of this arose ἔρες strife, 7 6. verbal disputa- 
tion. If διχοστασίαι, divisions (see Crit. notes) 
were genuine, we should have in this a climax, 
indicating the schisms before referred to. Ὅπου, 
whereas, occurs in the classics, also in a causal 
sense, because, in so far as, since. Passow. Ac- 
cording to de Wette, it is like εἰ, a conditional 
designation of the reason, ‘‘if there be,” ete. 
According to Meyer it implies a local conception 
of the conditional relation: ‘‘where there is” 
(comp. Heb. ix. 16: x. 18).—Kara ἄνϑρωπον (also 
Rom. iii. δ)--εσαρκικῶς. It is the opposite to 
‘“‘walking in the Spirit,” Gal. v. 25. What he 
means to say is, ‘your conduct conforms to the 
ways of men as they ordinarily are in their apos- 
tate and irreligious condition.’ 

Ver. 4. A further confirmation.—*‘ For when 
one says, ‘Iam of Paul;’ and another, ‘I 
am of Apollos.’—The allusion to the parties is 
not as full as in i. 12, inasmuch as he has in this 
paragraph only to do with that of Apollos, or 
rather with the opposition existing between this 
and that called after himself.” Mryrr. ‘These 
were at the same time the most important parties 
at Corinth.” OstanperR. Here likewise the distine- 
tion is not stated according to grammatical rules, 
The ἐγὼ μέν, however, brings out the contrast 
with emphasis: ‘I, on my part;’’ or, “1, at all 
events.” (Comp. Passow μέν, A. I., 11. 7; vol. IL. 
I. p. 175 and 177),—are ye not men.—The 
same usage as in ver. 3: κατ᾽ avUpwrov: “ after 
man’s fashion.” It was natural for the Jews to 
see in man (2 ΔΝ}, the earthly, an implication 

Tree 


of what was defective, imperfect, indeed the 
exact antithesis to God, and whatever was god- 
like. Hence the expression in the Old Testa- 
ment: ‘the children of men,” and especially 
‘the daughters of men” (Gen. v .', in opposition 
to ‘the sons of God.” (This is, according tothe 
only interpretation suited to the connection and 
the spirit of the Old Testament, which sets the 
sanctified portion of the race over against those 
who represent men, human nature severed from 
God). The expression as here used, is certainly 
unique, but. entirely in accordance with the ana- 
logy of Scripture. ‘It means people who have 
not been lifted above human infirmity, and in 
whom the Divine element is utterly wanting.” 
MEYER. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


Comp. on i. 12 ff.; ii. 6 ff.; ii. 1 ff. 

1. [Christian truth is of different grades, and 
suited to different capacities. It has rudiments for 
the simplest child, and profundities which the 
angels desire to look into, and can never fully 
penetrate. It begins with the plainest facts of 
history, furnishing in these the foundation of a 
saving faith, but every one of these facts con- 
duct us down into the deep things of God. Thus 
the Gospel is adapted to all classes of mankind. 
Its storehouse is furnished with all kinds of pro- 
visions, from the milk for babes to the strong 
meat for adults. In this we have one token of 
its ‘Divine wisdom, and of its celestial origin and 
eternal destiny. Infinitude lies back of all its 
lowliest approaches to man in his fallen state, 


CHAP. III. 1-4. 


,.,.-- τ΄, “ “ 8“  ΄ς--..---- 


and in all it presents to faith, it furnishes that 
on which mind and heart shall feed for ever- 
more]. 

2. The vanity of man apart from God. Human 
nature, originally so exalted in its likeness to 
God, so glorious in knowledge and voluntary 
power, has sunk so low by reason of sin, 
that God’s word, uttering ever thé language 
of truth, associates with man (when regarded 
apart from the person of Jesus, and from what 
may be realized through Him) the conception 
of something small, weak, incapable, transient, 
vain, false; in short, of such imperfection 
and depravity as results from a rupture of our 
communion with God. Hence the inquiry, ‘“‘ who 
art thou, O man?” (Rom. ix. 20; comp. ii. 1, 3); 
and, ‘what is man?” Ps. viii. 4; exliv. 3, ff; 
and the saying, ‘“‘all men are liars.” Rom. iii. 
4. Indeed, as used in common parlance, the 
term is often one of contempt. Luke xxii. 60: 
««Man, I know not what thou sayest.’”’ Matth. 
xxvi. 72: “1 do not know the man.’”’ On the 
contrary, in Christ everything wins a different 
aspect. While in the Old Testament the term, 
‘children of men,” is a disparaging epithet, 
Christ on the other hand, as ‘“‘the son of man,”’ 
wears the honors of One, who, though He entered 
into all the weakness of human nature, and in- 
curred its worst ills, yet rose again, and on this 
very account became the Mediator of a perfect 
communion with God, and the vehicle of all its 
consequent blessedness to the human race. By 
His righteousness He counterbalanced the sin of 
the old Adamic nature, and averts all its bitter 
results. He becomes also the sole Mediator be- 
tween God and man, and appears as the One who 
from the lowest depths of humiliation, has been 
raised to utmost height of majesty. Comp. xx. 
18; xxiv. 27, 830: xxv. 31; xxvi. 64, ete. All 
this was foreshadowed in the vision of Daniel, 
where the Son of man is seen to come in the clouds 
of heaven, and to whom is given eternal power 
and a kingdom without end (vii. 13), and where 
human nature thus honored by God, is contrasted 
with the brute nature, the beast, which develops 
itself in the kingdoms of this world. The oft- 


repeated title conferred on Ezekiel, HN ja: 

LORY a 
thou Son of man, may also be regarded as typical 
of this One who is preéminently the Son of 
man. It was bestowed on the prophet as the re- 
ceiver of the Divine communications, and was as 
honorable as it was humiliating (comp. Gerlach 
on Ezek. ii. 1). Of the same sort was the epi- 
thet, ‘‘Man of God,” which was conferred on the 
prophets and other messengers of God, and 
passed out from the Old Testament into the New 
Testament. In fine, it may be affirmed generally 
that wherever, and to the degree in which com- 
munion with God is in any way predicable, the 
designation ‘‘man”’ at once obtains a higher sig- 
nification, and becomes one of honor, and is pro- 
phetic of exaltation. Elsewhere it carries the 
opposite import. 


> 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Hevener:—l. The wisdom of the Christian 
teacher is shown in knowing how to adapt him- 
self to different ages, and to regard the necessi- 








71 





ties of his congregation; and to build up begin- 
ners unto perfection (ver. 1). 2. To the carnal 
nature belong self-love, vanity, ambition; these 
traits are exhibited in strife and partizanship. 
There is a zeal which is nothing more than an 
eagerness to maintain our own opinion, cause, 
or party, simply because it is ours, and we ex- 
pect to stand or fall with it, and not because 
conscience bids. From this comes strife, con- 
tention about points of difference. The issue is 
division. Since neither will yield, they separate. 
This accords with man’s fashion. Just as if 
Christianity were an affair of schools and sects, 
or as if one could act in the Church just as he 
does in the political world where factions and 
jealousies abound (ver. 2). 

Rircer:—l1. God’smethod of instruction requires 
that we do not overload. Novices are to be treated 
as children. Weare to be considerate of their 
weaknesses, and not to crowd upon them those 
deeper doctrines which can be properly judged 
of only by such as are spiritual and strong. 2. 
In regard to “milk” and ‘strong meat” let us 
not err. ‘ Milk” is a designation not of cheap- 
ness and meanness, but of what is most truthful 
and most nourishing to the spiritual life.— 
‘Strong meat”’ signifies not every thing which 
our intellectual curiosity may lust after, but the 
deeper disclosures of the fundamental verities of 
God’s kingdom, the knowledge of which pro- 
motes growth in grace. 3. The carnal mind, 
suspicious, opinionated, and thus divisive, not only 
begets oppositions in doctrine, but also diversities 
in practice, which end in schism. 

Srarke:—l. Cr: to become a believer is not 
the result of a fit of enthusiasm, as if the wind 
were to blow upon a person and he straightway 
became perfect; but we must hear, learn, pray, 
read, inquire until we are transformed from one 
degree of conviction unto another. 2. Hep: 
God’s children often have gross and unacknow- 
ledged faults which linger in them until they 
have waxed in faith and grown strong to over- 
come. 8. To discourse to young converts of the 
deeper mysteries of Christian doctrine were as 
irrational as to give strong meat to babes. And 
since with the majority growth is slow and diffi- 
cult, we must often continue longer to deal out to 
them ‘the sincere milk of the Word.” 

Gossner :—Every one thinks his party has the 
kernel and others only the shell. Whereas they 
all are apt to let the kernel alone and dispute 
about the shell, as if that were the kernel (ver. 
4). So is it with those who, having begun in 
spirit, go back to the flesh. Mistaking inciden- 
tals for essentials, they grow weak in the inward 
man and are soon puffed up (vv. 1, 21). 

W. F. Besser:—The mind of Christ tolerates 
no party-spirit, and no love of divisions. The. 
conscience of many in this day is not sufficiently 
tender on this point. Indeed there are numbers 
who consider their Christianity so much the 
purer in proportion as they disregard the visible 
exhibition of Church unity, and are reckless in 
breaking the bond of peace which outwardly 
unites companions in one faith. 

R. W. Rosertson :—‘‘ Strong meat” does not 
mean high doctrine such as Election, Regenera- 
tion, Justification by faith, but ‘ Perfection,” 
strong demands on Self, a severe and noble Life 


72 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


.-ιιιιιι Ά Ά τι ι ι..δι:.-ς.Ἐςςς-ς-ςος..-Ὁ-.----ς- ͵ῳ ΄ή᾽ »-η ------------.-ς--,-.- -ς-“ τ Sans 


The danger of extreme demands made on hearts 
unprepared for such is seen in the case of An- 
anias. | 

[N. Emmons. Ver. 2. Doctrines of the Gospel 
food for Christians. 1. What doctrines the Apos- 
tle did preach to the Corinthians: a. Depravity; 
ὃ. Regeneration; 6. Love; d. Faith; 6. Sanctifi- 
cation; f. Final Perseverance; g. Divine Sove- 
reignty; A. Election. 11. Why these are called 
milk:* a. Because they are easy to be under- 


the pious heart; 6. Because they are nourishing. 
Ill. Why the Apostle preached these rather than 
others to the Corinthians: a. Their internal state 
required such preaching; ὁ. Their external state 
required it. Improvement. 1. If these doctrines 
are milk, what is meat? a. The rites and cere- 
monies of the Mosaic Law; 4. The types and 
predictions of the Old Testament; c. The predic- 
tions of the New Testament. 2. The doctrines 
which Paul preached to the Corinthians, as 
shown above, have been misrepresented. 8, We 


stood; ὁ. Because they are highly pleasing to 

have a criterion to determine who are the plain- 
est preachers. 4. No people are incapable of 
hearing the doctrines Paul preached to the Co- 
rinthians]. 


[* One would suppose the aforementioned doctrines to be 
the str ngest kind of meat. The sermon is interesting as a 
specimen. ]} 


Vv. THE ESTIMATE TO BE PUT ON TEACHERS AND THEIR WORK. THEIR VALUE TO 
BE PROVED IN THE DAY OF TRIAL. 


Cuarrer III. 5-15. 
5 Who then is Paul, who zs Apollos, but? ministers by whom ye believed, even as 
6 the Lord gave to everyman? I have [om. have] planted, Apollos watered; but God 
7 gave [was giving] the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither 
8 he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he 
that watereth are one: and every man [each one] shall receiye his own reward accord- 
9 ing to his own labour. For we are labourers together with God: ye are God’s hus- 
bandry, ye are God’s building. According to the grace of God which is given unto 
me, as a wise master builder, I have [om. have*] laid the foundation, and another 
buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For 
other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if 
any man build upon this® foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 
Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it 
shall be revealed by fire; and the fire [itself: αὐτόν] shall try every man’s work of 
what sort it is. If any man’s work [shall] abide’ which he hath built thereupon, he 
shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss; but 
he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 


15 


1 Ver. 5.—The Ree τίς, instead of which Lach. and Meyer read τί [following A. B. Cod. Sin. and others] is sustained by 
nearly the same preponderance of authorities as declare for the mention of Apollos first. The received text, which puts 
Paul first, is to be explained from vy. 4 and 6. The repetition of ἐστίν is also established by the better authorities. 

2 Ver. 5.—Before διάκονοι the Rec., which Tisch., 6th ed., follows, has ἀλλ᾽ 7. This makes the question continue to 
ἐπιστεύσατε. But the best authorities are against this reading, and it is therefore rejected by Lach. Tisch. and others. 
{For the true rendering see thé Exegetical comment.] ; 

' 8 Ver. 10.—The Rec. τέθεικα is retained by Tisch. ed. 6 [also Alf., Words.]. But Lach. following A. B. C. [Cod. Sin.] 
reads ἔθηκα. 

4 Ver. 11.—The Rec. Ἰησοῦς 6 Χριστός is feebly supported. Better Ἰησοῦς Χριστός. Tisch., ed 6, Χριστός "Inaods. 

5 Ver. 12.—rovrov is rejected by Lach. according to A. B. C. (Cod. Sin.] but is retained by Tisch. in accordance with 
many weighty authorities [so too by Wordsworth, Alford]. 

6 Vey. 13.—avro is inserted after πῦρ by Lachmann, Meyer, Tisch. [Aiford, Wordsworth, Stanley] according to the best 
authorities. [A. B.C. Cod. Sin. Origen, Chry. Eus., etc.] 

7 Ver. 14, μενεῖ, future, is better authenticated [Latin version]. Received μένει [see note]. 


Lord who employs them; then, from yy. 10-15, 





EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


“From this point onward to ver. 23, Paul 
proceeds to explain in what light the Corinthians 
were to regard their spiritual teachers, and the 
work which these performed among them. And 
first, from vy. 5-9, he deals with the relation 
which the human instrumentalities sustain to the 


with the responsibility which they have for their 
work and the decision to which it is liable; and, 
finally, from vv. 16-28, with the position which 
the Church holds and ought to pursue towards 
them.”—Buraer. Ver. 5.—Who then is Ap- 
ollos ? and who is Paul ?—The reading τί: 
what, is at least as easily explainable on the 
ground that the answer given appears to point 


CHAP. III. 5-15. 


73 





rather to “‘what?’ than to “‘who?” as the read- 
ing τίς is capable of being accounted for from 
the effort to assimilate the genders. —[‘‘odv: 
then, follows on the assumption of the truth of 
their divided state.”—ALrorp.] The question 
here put is not to be regarded as coming from 
the readers (Riickert) g. d. ‘Who are Apollos 
and Paul, if we may not have them as our lead- 
ers?” This thought would have been expressed 
in quite a different manner—more his own.— 
(Comp. xv. 34; Rom. ix. 19 ff.). It is simpler 
to understand the connection thus: ‘You call 
yourselves after Apollos and Paul. Who are 
these persons, then? From the answer given, it 
is clearly implied that the partizanship of their 
followers does not accord with the spirit of the 
leaders they have chosen, and is condemned as a 
carnality.—Ministers, through whom ye 
believed.—Were ἀλλ᾽ ἢ: but, to be taken as 
genuine (see under the text), then we should have 
here an emphatic implication that Apollos and 
Paul were nothing else than mere ministers. 
There is in these words a mixture of two con- 
structions: οὐδὲν ἄλλο, ἀλλά: nothing else but; 
and οὐδὲν ἄλλο 4: nothing else than. So Meyer 
on 2 Cor. i. 13, Fritzsche, according to Her- 
mann on Viger, construes it otherwise: ‘but 
either—or I know not what.” The phrase is to 
be found in Luke xii. 15, where its correctness 
is undisputed. It was plainly, therefore, not 
rejected because of its objectionableness. δεά- 
κονοι: deacons, ministers, is here to be under- 
stood in its broadest sense, as contrasted with 
leaders. We may supplement ‘‘of your Church,” 
comp. ver. 21, and Matth. xx. 28; or ‘of God,” 
or ‘‘of Christ,” comp. ver. 6 ff; 2 Cor. vi. 4, etc. 
The words following would favor the one as well 
as the other, or perhaps hint at a combination 
of the two—‘‘ ministers of Christ in your behalf.” 
(Col. i. 7.)—through whom ye believed.— 
Bengel says briefly and forcibly: ‘ Through 
whom, not in whom” (Jas. i. 7). They are 
thereby designated as instruments in God’s hand 
for the production of faith. And such they were 
in their function as preachers and teachers of 
truth. But this instrumentality was of different 
kinds; that of Paul, for the exercise of the faith, 
of Apollos, for its further development. This 
process is expressed in the aorist tense, as in 
Rom. xiii. 11; Gal. ii. 16.—even as the Lord 
gave to each one.—This statement is made to 
bring forward prominently the fact of the depend- 
ence of the ministers on the Lord, both for their 
gifts and their ministry, and so to dampen the 
disposition ‘‘to boast in men.’ καὶ ἑκάστω 
ὧσ ὁ κώριος ἔδωκεν, not an instance of 
attraction, as if ἕκαστος se. διάκονος ἐστιν, ὡς---- 
ἔδωκεν av7@. But ἑκαστῷ stands first by way of 
emphasis, as in Rom. xii. 3, because having 
spoken of them in general, he wishes next to 
designate what is peculiar to each one. There 
is no need of taking ‘‘the Lord” to mean God, 
instead of Christ [so Hodge], contrary to the 
usage of Paul, nor are we compelled to this by 
vy. 6,9, 10. The endowment of ministers with 
manifold gifts is also ascribed to Christ in Eph. 
iv. 7 ff. In what follows, when ‘‘God”’ is intro- 
duced, the Apostle is speaking of something else, 
viz. of the Divine blessing, and of the dependence 
on God for desired results. 











Ver. 6. I planted, Apollos watered, but 
God was giving the increase.—Under these 
figures Paul exhibits partly the diversity of ope- 
ration between him and Apollos, and partly their 
equal dependence on Divine favor for success. 
Paul labored for the founding of the Church, for 
the planting of the spiritual crop; Apollos for 
the further development of the life of faith thus 
begun, for the edification of the Church; he 
watered and helped to mature the growing crop. 
But after all it was to God, as the efficient cause, 
that both owed the results obtained. It was His 


power, working in them and through them, that 


caused the faith to strike root, and spring up, 
and bring forth fruit. ‘‘Av&dvewv: to increase, a 
designation of the attainment of an object which 
had been furthered by the Divine powers at work 
in the instruments, and by divers other auxiliary 
operations of grace which accompanied or pre- 
pared the way for them. [““ηὔξανεν : was giving. 
Observe the force of the Imperfect, intimating a 
continued bestowal of Divine grace as distin- 
guished from the transitory acts of His ministers 
whose operations are described by aorists.”— 
Worps. |. 

Ver. 7. So then [‘‘dore: an illative particle 
of frequent occurrence”? Worps. | neither is he 
that planteth any thing, neither he that 
watereth, but He that giveth the in- 
crease, even God.—The inference here drawn 
goes to the discrediting of all human organs 
taken by themselves, and to the rebuking of all 
partisanship. ἔστι re: is any thing, either in 
numero est: in account (comp. Acts ver. 386) or yet 
more strongly, is absolutely any thing. On the 
other hand, to the last clause we naturally sup- 
plement τὰ πάντα éoriv: is all (xv. 28; Col. iii. 
11). Bengel: “418. something, and, because He 
is alone, all things.” What is here viewed sepa- 
rately for the purpose of counteracting the ten- 
dency to unduly exalt the instrument is elsewhere 
taken together; the agency of the instrument 
and the agency of God in their coricrete unity 
(Rom. xi. 14; 1 Tim. iv. 16). [‘‘In this passage 
ministers are brought into comparison with the 
Lord, and the reason of this comparison is, that 
mankind, while estimating grudgingly the grace 
of God, are too lavish in their commendation of 
ministers, and in this manner they snatch away 
what is God’s, with a view of transferring it to 
themselves.” CALVIN. ]. 

Ver. 8. Now He that planteth and He 
that watereth are one.—[‘‘év: one thing 
neuter. God is ὁ εἷς, mas. He is the one agent; 
they are an instrument in His hands; and they 
are one a8 united together in Christ. But they 
are not what you would make them by your 
party factions to be, separate persons and rival 
heads and leaders of opposing sects.’”” Worps. ]. 
Paul does not here intend to deny the different 
merits of ministers or their separate worth, as 
though they all stood at par (Bengel, Billroth); 
he is referring only to their office and services. 
They are alike ministers. And in so saying he 
means to counteract all rivalry and all exaltation 
of one over another. The unity and mutual 
connection, which he asserts, do not, however, 
exclude diversities both in their labors and in 
the recognition of these labors, on the part of the 
Lord, in ways corresponding thereto.—And 


74 





each one shall receive his own reward 
according to his own labor.—The words 
‘his own” —‘his own’? stand in contrast with 
‘“‘are one.” Bengel styles it ‘‘an appropriate 
repetition antithetic to the ‘‘one.” κόπος de- 
notes not the result, but the labor, the effort put 
forth. This, however unsuccessful, involves a 
fidelity and devotion which can be estimated by 
God alone. κατά indicates also the qualitative, 
and not merely the quantitative relation—i δέον: 
own, that which especially belongs to each one, 
both in the labor expended and in the reward. 
The μεσϑός, as the context shows, signifies 
the Divine recompense. The full λήψεται (λῆ- 
μψεται, Altice Ionic form) points to the reward 
which will be conferred at the coming of Christ. 
(Comp, iv. 5; 1 Thess. ii. 19; 2 Tim. iv. 8; Dan. 
xii. 3;. Matth. xxv. 20 ff; 1 Pet. v. 4). This 
reward is praise bestowed for the labor done. 
According to Bengel, ‘‘Something more than 
salvation.” It is an addition to the blessedness 
common to all the subjects of grace, which, as 
Osiander observes, consists in the various degrees 
of glory (δόξα) conferred on them (comp. Luke 
xix. 17 ff.); moreover it is a reward of grace, 
since the whole thing rests upon the plan and 
promise and operation of grace. Yet it is ap- 
portioned in righteousness, ‘‘to each one his 
own.” ‘Relatively to redemption nothing can 
be said of desert. But within the sphere of re- 
demption, the question comes up, ‘how faithfully 
has a person employed the grace received, and 
wrought with it. Here it can be asserted ‘To 
him that hath shall be given.’ This is what 
Paul means by reward.” Neanver. That such a 
reward is to be expected appears from what fol- 
lows:— 

Ver. 9. For we are God's fellow-labor- 
ers, God’s husbandry, God’s building are 
ye.—tThe emphatic word here is ϑεοῦ, God’s. 
Since it is God’s work to which we devote our 
labor, each in his own part, we are therefore to 
expect it from His truthfulness that He will not 
refuse to us the corresponding reward. This 
reference to what precedes (Meyer) has a decided 
advantage over that interpretation which regards 
these words as a comprehensive exposition of the 
calling of spiritual teachers, and their debt of 
service to the congregation (ver. 5 ff.), and espe- 
cially of their oneness in it (ver. 8). In this 
case the γάρ, for, in relation to the first clause, 
would be explanatory and in reference to the 
second, causal (Osiander). ‘It is also prefera- 
ble to that interpretation which, in order tomake 
out here a rebuke of party spirit, takes the sense 
to be: Every thing is to be ascribed to God; 
therefore to God be all the glory.” Burerer. In- 
asmuch as the idea of a reward recurs also in 
what follows, it perhaps would be more proper 
to regard these sentences only as confirmatory of 
what was said respecting the reward. [Stanley 
takes the ‘‘for” as giving the reason for the 
oneness among the teachers. ‘Their object is 
the same (though their modes of working are 
different), for it is God who is our fellow-laborer, 








etc.; therefore they cannot be set against each | 


other.” Hodge combines the two ideas]. Θεοῦ 
ovvepyoi—God’s helpers, who work with God,— 
not: ‘*who do God’s work associatedly”’ [as 
Olshausen], for this would be etymologically in- 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a aie ἐπε τσ σπ θ -- 
admissible. Even so συνεργὸν ἡμῶν, 1 Thess. ili, 
2. Although God works all in all, yet He works 
through His servants, whom He recognizes as 
helpers in His work, and whom he suffers to 
work, each one in his own peculiar way. Calvin: 
Eximium elogium ministerii, quod, quum per se agere 
possit Deus, nos homunciones tanquam adjutores ad- 
siscat, per quos ita solus agit, ut tamen vicissim cum 
eo laborent (cf. Osiander in loco). Here we have 
a hint of the dignity of the ministerial office, and 
of our obligation to keep in view God’s objects in 
it. [Though, indeed, it must be said that the de- 
sign of the argument is not to dignify the teach- 
ers, but to abate the excessive estimate put upon 
them]. Θεοῦ γεώργιον, a field belonging to God; 
so also ϑεοῦ οἰκοδομῇ, God’s building. The Geni- 
tive of cause (—it is God who built you) [so Al- 
ford] is less fitting here, since Paul is speaking 
in the context concerning the performance and 
the reward of teachers, and in these statements 
he is establishing the expectation that God will 
grant to them their reward on the ground that 
that on which they are at work, belongs to Him. 
Γεώργιον (also in Proy. xxiv. 80; xxxi. 16)= 
tilled land, a field, a garden, a vineyard; oixodouh, 
a word of the later Greek—oixodouia, οἰκοδόμημα. 
Both indicate the kind of labor pursued by God’s 
co-workers: the cultivation of a field, the rear- 
ing of a building. But in making God (ϑεοῦ) 
prominent, the subjects on both sides retire into 
the background in a corresponding degree. 
Hence neither “we” (ἡμεῖς) nor “you” (ὑμεῖς) 
is expressed. Taking the whole context in its 
broader scope, and considering the aim of the 
whole paragraph, we might suppose with Chry- 
sostom, that in the repeated mention of God in 
the last clause there was an implied rebuke of 
the tendency in the Church to call themselves 
after men [so Words.] (ver. 4) (cf. Osiander). 
The figure in οἰκοδομὴ (building), analogous to 
that in the ‘‘temple of God” (ver. 16; 2 Cor. vi. 
16; Eph. ii. 21) is carried out still further in 
what follows. 

Ver. 10. Paul here proceeds to state what he 
himself had done towards erecting God's build- 
ing.—According unto the grace of God, 
which was given unto me.—By “grace” he 
means not the Apostolic office as such, but those 
peculiar endowments which qualified him for 
laying the foundation (comp. i. 8, 4). Lit. ‘by 
virtue of the favor shown unto me.’ And this 


favor was manifest both in the call to office and — 


in the bestowment of those gifts which enabled 
him to become a co-worker with God. By this 
acknowledgment οὐ his indebtedness in advance, 
he obviates all misconception with a wise humi- 
lity, and avoids all appearance of arrogance. 
The same expression occurs in Rom. xy. 15; xii. 
8; Gal. ii. 9; Eph. iii. 2—as a wise master 
master-builder I laid the foundation.— 
This was done in that preaching of Christ cruci- 
fied, which had first elicited their faith (ver. 11; 
ii. 2). [‘*eué2cov, a foundation. St. Paul uses 
the masculine form, ver. 11,:and 2 Tim. ii. 19, 
St. Luke the neuter (Acts xvi. 26); which is At- 
tic. The masculine is very appropriate here, be- 
cause the foundation is Christ.’? Words. In say- 
ing that he laid this ‘‘as” a wise masterbuilder, 
‘he does not vaunt himself, but propounds 
himself as an example.” Curysostom]. The 


Dal 


a! ie. 


CHAP. III. 5-15. τὸ 





wisdom he claims, might be regarded as that be- 
tokened in the act of laying a foundation, since 
the attempt to build without such preliminary 
work would indicate a lack of sense. Yet ver. 
11 seems to imply that he had reference to the 
nature of the foundation, in that it was the only 
one suited for a ‘“‘ building of God,” and such a 
one as a wise builder would alone lay. [Why 
not both?]. Σοφός, wise, skilful—thoroughly un- 
derstanding his art. The same usage occurs in 
the classics. The claim here made, tells against 
the partisan disparagement of his labors.—and 
another buildeth thereon.—dAdoc another, 
not merely Apollos, but also every person who 
had engaged in the work of the ministry at 
Corinth, ‘‘more especially those successors of his 
who werestill laboring inthe Church.” OsiANDER. 
(Comp. iv. 15). To such, he, as the Apostolic 
‘‘masterbuilder,” gives the caution.—But let 
each one look how he buildeth thereon.— 
‘sHow,” ὦ 6. in what way, and with what mate- 
rial. He thus warns them of the greatness of 
their responsibility, and of the importance of 
making the edifice correspond with the founda- 
tion. On this point he explains himself further 
by showing what is the only proper foundation 
of a church. ᾿ 
Ver. 11. For other foundation can no 
man lay besides that lying there.—He 
here explains why he speaks simply of building 
the superstructure, and says nothing in regard to 
the foundation. This had been already laid, and 
was confessedly all right. There could possibly 
be no idea of changing or modifying that. [‘‘In 
taking this for granted, he implies the strongest 
possible caution against attempting to lay any 
other.” Alf.]. The emphasis here rests on 
“foundation,” whichisaccordingly putfirstin the 
sentence. δύναται, not may, but can. Paul here 
wishes to express the absolute impossibility of 
change, without entirely destroying the character 
of the building. And hence there naturally fol- 
lows the utter inadmissibleness of attempting to 
lay any other foundation. The thing is so con- 
trary to the nature of the case, that no Christian 
teacher can be supposed willing to undertake it. 
παρά, alongside of, and yet not touching; hence, 
besides, beyond, contrary to. In regard to κείμενον, 
lying there it may be asked, whether the idea in- 
volved in τέϑεικα, J laid, of ver. 10, is here re- 
sumed, so that it refers to what Paul had done 
[‘‘in which case it would have been tedévra.” 
Worps. ], or whether it implies what had been 
done by God in sending His Son to be our Re- 
deemer, and laying him as the precious corner- 
stone of His Church [or whether it is with 
Words. to be taken in the middle sense as lying 
.there ‘“‘by His own free will and act.”]. Adopt- 
ing the second of the above interpretations, the 
verb “1 laid,” in ver. 10, would indicate Paul’s 
accordance with the Divine prodedure. He had 
laid in its place at Corinth that foundation which 
God had provided for the Church universal, by 
proclaiming Christ there as the only proper ob- 
ject of faith. This would accord better with the 
more general form κείμενον, and also establish the 
impossibility declared in the words, ‘‘can no 
man.” ‘If God has laid a foundation, then surely 
no Christian teacher will think of laying any 
other. Accordingly, I also have made this the 











—— 


basis of the Church at Corinth, and could do no 

otherwise.’ [This word, κεῖται, from which 

keiwevov comes, descriptive of Christ’s character 

as the one foundation of His Church, is applied 

to Him in His first presentation in the material 

temple at Jerusalem. Luke ii. 34, οὗτος κεῖται εἰς 

πτῶσιν. It is observable also that the man of 

sin, who places himself as a foundation of the: 
Church, in the room of Christ, is called ὁ ἀντι- 

κείμενυς. 2 Thess. 11. 4. Worps.]. What. this: 
foundation is, is expressed in the relative clause, 

—which is Christ Jesus.—By this he means: 
Christ in His own person, not simply the doctrine 
of Christ as being a fundamental doctrine. 

[‘‘The former interpretation which is adopted. 
by many distinguished commentators (de Wette,, 
Alf., Stanley), is more in accordance with the 
common representations of scripture, and per-- 
haps also with the form of expression here used.. 
The second, however, is certainly more consist-- 
ent with the context. In saying that he had: 
laid the foundation, Paul could only mean that 
he had in Corinth taught the doctrine concerning: 
the person and work of Christ.”” Hoper. but 
surely it was not the doctrine as such that was. 
the foundation. The doctrine availed only as it: 
brought Christ directly and personally present 
to the mind of the Church, and induced them te. 
build on Him. The distinction Kling maintains. 
is a very important one. There is constant dan- 
ger of persons mistaking the doctrine of Christ for 
the person of Christ. The former is the founda- 
tion of a theology, the latter of a life. ] 

Ver. 12. The nature of the foundation being, 
settled, he now proceeds to consider the several 
ways in which superstructure might be carried: 
up.—But—|[ ‘The dé implies that though there: 
can be but one foundation, there are many ways 
of building upon it.”” Atr.]—if any man build 
upon the foundation, gold, silver, precious 
stones, wood, hay, stubble.—He here illus- 
trates the various kinds of material that might 
be employed in the edifice, either worthy and 
durable, that could stand the test of fire, or- 
worthless and incapable of passing the ordeal. 
Both sorts are mentioned in lively succession, 
without any express exhibition of the diversities. 
implied. According to the best and largest num- 
ber of commentators, from Clem., Alex., down to: 
Osiander and Meyer, Paul here intends to denote: 
by this building material,not persons, but doctrines, 
such as when joined with faith in Christ may or 
may not suit the foundation; such as in worth 
and durability do or do not correspond with the: 
precious indestructible corner-stone. That the: 
wood, hay and stubble were designed in general], 
to signify such teachings as mingled the weak. 
and disfiguring products of human wisdom, art,. 
philosophy and Jewish traditions with the truth. 
of God, is very evident. But any attempts to. 
particularize, either as to the dogmas referred: 
to, or as to the parts of the building they were 
intended for, would be futile and out of taste. 
Moreover, we are to hold fast to the idea of but 
one building contemplated, into which all the 
different kinds of material specified are worked, 
and not to imagine [as Wetst., Billr., Stanley] 
that two sorts of building are had in view, such 
as a palace and a hut; or that a whole city was 
intended, ‘‘the city of God,” for instance. We 


76 


THE FIRST EPIS’LE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





might also very appropriately, but rather by way 
of accommodation, bring under consideration 
here the distinctive practical fruits produced 
under the different kinds of teaching and the 
different sorts of church members brought in and 
trained under the same. [So Theodoret adopted 
by Stanley, who deems the practical fruits the 
main thing referred to, and adds, ‘‘He is here 
preparing the way for the accusation of the in- 
cestuous person.” ]. To suppose, however, with 
Olsh., that there is any allusion to the private 
work of personal sanctification, would be untena- 
ble, inasmuch as the entire context treats solely 
of ministerial functions. Riickert’s interpreta- 
tion is too abstract and general. Proceeding on 
the ground that ‘‘ work” (ἔργον) with Paul signi- 
fies the entire business of life, he takes the sense 
to be: ‘‘only he who builds upon the true foun- 
dation in a right manner, so that his work will 
abide the test, is entitled toa reward. He who 
builds on it unsuitably, can expect none. This 
only, however, can be said for his comfort, that 
he will not forfeit his salvation since it was his 
will at least to further the work of the Lord.” 
On this whole subject, consult Osiander and 
Meyer. ([/‘‘Precious stones” here means stones 
valuable for building, such as granite and mar- 
ble. ‘‘Gold and silver,” were extensively employed 
in adorning ancient temples, and are therefore 
appropriately used as symbols of pure doctrine. 
‘‘ Wood, hay and stubble” are the perishable ma- 
terials out of which ordinary houses were built. 
Wood for the doorsand posts, hay mixed with mud 
for the walls, and straw for the roof. These 
‘materials, unsuited for the temple of God, are 
the appropriate symbols of false doctrines.” 
Hover]. 

Ver. 13. Every man’s work will be 
‘made manifest.—The worth or worthlessness, 
the durability or perishableness of what a man 
has wrought is not to remain concealed.—For 
the day will declare it.—i. ¢., will make evi- 
dent what is genuine or not genuine, what is 
truth and what mere show. This is a matter 
which often remains for a long time uncertain. 
But what are we to understand by this day of 
revelation? Not certainly the time of Jerusa- 
lem’s overthrow [as Starke], for the Apostle is 
not speaking here of Jewish traditions, the va- 
nity of which would then be exposed. Nor yet 
time in general, or any prolonged lapse of time, 
for the term ‘‘day” is never used in this sense by 
the New Testament writers, nor would it suit the 
following context. Ever since the period of the 
Reformation, Calyin’s view has widely prevailed, 
that the allusion here is to the time when the 
pure knowledge of the Gospel should spread 
over the earth. So others also. But the apos- 
tolic usage and modes of thought warrant our 
understanding it only of the day of Christ’s second 
coming (comp. iv. 5; Rom. ii. 16; 2 Cor. v. 10). 
This is the period of that searching, sifting trial 
which is to begin at the house of God (1 Pet. 
iv. 17), and which after manifold preludes will 
reach its consummation in the appearance of our 
Lord. In this sense the word ‘day’ stands 
without any explanatory term in Heb. x. 25; 1 
Thess. v. 4ss.— Because it is revealed in 
fire.—What is revealed? The work of which he 
has just said ‘it shall be made manifest.” To 


this it is objected that the sentence would in that 
case be tautological. But a repetition of this 
prominent thought will appear less strange in 
view of the fact that it is more distinctly de- 
fined by the additional words, “by fire,” and 
that the following clause appears to be a fitting 
further development of them. It would indeed 
be most natural to regard ‘‘day” as the thing 
revealed. [So Alf., Stanley, Words., Hodge]. 
But nowhere is it said that the day of the Lord 
is revealed. Such a mode of speech would be 
unusual. It were better, with Bengel, to supply 
“‘the Lord” as the nominative, since indeed it 
is the day of the Lord that is referred to, and 
this construction would have its parallel in 2 
Thess. i. 17: ‘* When the Lord Jesus shall be re- 
vealed from heaven in flaming fire.” Here fire 
is represented as accompanying the manifesta- 
tion of Jesus, (not, however, as a means of ven- 
geance). But such a supplying of a word is 
warranted only in case no other suitable ex- 
planation can befound. If then ‘‘ work” be the 
proper subject, ‘‘the fire”? must be taken to de- 
note that by which the work is tested. The re- 
lation of this clause to the foregoing then would 
be this: because fire is the agency by which the 
work is tried, therefore will the day of the Lord, 
who is to appear in flaming fire (2 Thess. i.), 
the day which is to burn as an oven (Matth. iv. 
1), make this work manifest. [‘* To show the cer- 
tainty and perpetual imminence of that fiery trial 
of the Last Day, Paul uses the present tense 
(ἀποκαλύπτετα ἐ) ts revealed.” Worvs. |—And 
each one’s work, what sort it is this fire 
itself shall prove.—tThis clause stands inde- 
pendently of ὅτε, because, and sums up the 
whole truth, stating once more the ordeal con- 
templated and the peculiar means of its accom- 
plishment. It is the fire that is to try the work, 
and demonstrate its quality—ré πῦρ αὐτό, the 
Jjire itself, by its own specific action. That this 
means neither the Holy Spirit nor yet persecu- 
tions of any sort is evident from the interpreta- 
tion given to the word ‘‘day.” Still less tenable 
is the Roman Catholic interpretation, which dis- 
covers herein an allusion to purgatory. (Council 
of Florence). [‘‘The fire of which St. Paul 
speaks is the Fire of the Great Day; not a Fire 
of any intermediate state. And the Fire which 
he describes does not cleanse, as that intermedi- 
ate fire is feigned to do, but dries and destroys. 
It is not a Purgatorial but a Probationary Fire.” 
Worps. Besides ‘“ Paul is here speaking of min~ 
isters and their doctrines, and not of believers 
in general.” Hopar,9,v. 1]. ‘We deny not 
that anticipations of the judicial fire of the Last 
Day may be traced in the fiery trials with which 
God will visit His own house (1 Pet. ivy. 12-17); 
but the fire by which Christians will be refined 
and purged before the end comes will burn not 
on the other side but this side of death.” W. F. 
Besser. Neanper onthe contrary says: ‘*The 
fire is an image of the progressive purifying pro- 
cess which goes on along the course of the de- 
velopment of the Church. This process will al- 
low only what is genuine and Divine to stand.” 
It is, however, the outward and substantial mani- 
festation of the judicial energy of the Lord, who 
will work as a purifying flame, so that everything 
in the labors of those who have been endeavor 


CHAP. III. 5-15. 79 





ing to build up the Church, that does not carry 
the Divine impress, but is the vain and perish- 
able invention of man, will be brought to nought. 
Of this manifestation we have a prelude now in 
the continuous judgment of the Holy Ghost, and 
in the persecutions which the Church here suf- 
fers. The effect of it is exhibited antithetically 
in 

Vers. 14,15. If any one’s work shall 
abide which he built thereon, he shall 
receive a reward.—This is the positive side. 
Mevet, shall abide (the future corresponds with 
κατακαήσεται), shall stand the fire which is to con- 
sume all that is unworthy. ‘‘Reward,” as in 
ver. 8. By this we may understand on the one 
hand, a presentation before Christ as a faithful 
and true workman, whose work is honorable to 
the Master (1 Thess. ii. 19 ff.; Phil. ii. 15 ff.); 
and on the other hand, an appointment to higher 
trusts in the kingdom of God (Dan. xii. 3; Matth. 
xix. 28; 2 Tim. iv. 8; Matth. xxv. 21-23). «*The 
abiding of his edifice will be itself his great 
reward, just as Paul terms the fruit of his labor, 
and of his founding the Church his boasting and 
his crown in the day of the Lord (2 Cor. i. 14; 
Phil. ii. 16; 1 Thess. ii. 19). Still we do not in 
this completely gauge the reward of a true 
builder.” W. F. Besser.—Next comes the ne- 
gative side.—If any one’s work shall be 
burned, he shall suffer loss.—The omission 
of the conjunction is owing to the rapid rush of 
the thought, and renders the style more vivid. 
The “loss” spoken of is not of ‘“‘the work,” but 
“the reward.” ‘True, the judicial fire, which 
consumes all impure and untenable doctrines, 
will also consume his whole performance; but 
the consequence will be that he will forfeit his 
reward, and so incur damage (comp. ζημιοῦσϑαι, 
2 Cor. vii. 7-9; Phil. iii. 8; Matth. xvi. 26). [*It 
is possible that this whole image, as addressed 
to the Corinthians, may have been suggested or 
at least illustrated by the conflagration of Co- 
rinth under Mummius; the stately temples (one 
of them remaining to this day) standing amidst 
the universal destruction of the meaner build- 
ings.” SranLey].—But he himself shall be 
saved ;—airéc δὲ, he himself, as contrasted 
with the reward [and also with the work]. Here 
it is presupposed that the individual has been 
building indeed upon the true foundation, Christ, 
but has failed only in respect to the manner of 
his building (from infirmity of the flesh or from 
ignorance, as Calvin suggests). Altogether super- 
fluous and incorrect would it be to translate it ‘he 
can be saved.’ To supply the condition, ‘if it be 
possible,’ is wholly arbitrary; and still more so 
to assume that by ‘work’ is meant the scho- 
lars of a good teacher who perish without his 
fault. Many of the Fathers interpret σωϑήσεται, 
be saved, in the sense of τηρηϑήσεται, should be 
preserved, as if it meant: shall be not annihilated 
but kept alive in eternal torments and in fire. 
But this, apart from all other objections, is con- 
trary to the usage of the word in the New Testa- 
ment. It can only mean: he shall obtain 
salvation in Christ. ‘‘Here we have one clear 
evidence that salvation is not a reward, but is 
freely given to us through the merits of Christ.” 
W. F. Besser. —Yet so as through fire. 
--ἰδεὰ πυρός). Herein is expressed the nar- 





rowness of the person’s escape. : 
snatched as a brand from the HOSA ares 
nothing but his bare life (comp. jittle know- 
Amos iv. 11; Jude 23). The image +yyi5t and 
of a man living in a house, but of one OCapld] 
with the building of it, and who just delivers ug 
self with great effort from the conflagration tha. 
has caught his work, and sees in sadness and 
anxiety the loss of all he has done, to the marring 
of his blessedness. And such a person attains only 
to a lower stage of bliss (comp. Matth. xx. 16; 
Mark x. 31, last clause). So Meyer, rejecting 
however, the idea that words embody anything of 
the nature of a proverb, since Paul is here speak- 
ing literally of a consuming fire. But neverthe- 
less the use of the word dc, as, constrains us to 
regard itassuch. For although we should in- 
terpret ‘“‘as” in the same manner as we do in 
Jno. i. 14, and render, ‘just as one would expect 
in the case of a conflagration,’ still it would 
amount to about the same thing. Only we might 
say it is not to be understood as a proverb merely 
(comp. Osiander, p. 174 ἢ). 


DOGMATICAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Ministers are co-workers with God.—It is in 
this that the highest dignity of the Christian 
teacher consists. To wish to be nothing but an 
instrument for performing the Divine will, to aim 
at nothing but the fulfilment of God’s designs, to 
desire to have and to exercise no power save what 
this line of action includes, ¢o covet no reward, no 
honor, no enjoyment, excepting what comes from 
such labor, and helps to the more complete dis- 
charge of this calling, this is the characteristic of 
a servant of God, who follows Christ in self-denial 
and love, and purposes only to save souls for 
God and consecrates to this all his faculties, and 
is diligent to present to God a work pleasing to 
Him and honorable to His holy Son, and neither 
seeks nor strives after any glory for himself, 
but is content that God be exalted Supreme over 
all, and that His will alone should prevail. To 
such a person, nothing is too insignificant to 
be undertaken, provided it serves this end. No 
work will he be ashamed of or shun, even though 
it be among those who are low, or despised, 
or degraded, provided the gracious designs of 
God may be accomplished thereby. Such ser- 
vants are, in truth, co-workers with God. He 
takes them into a fellowship of labor with Him- 
self. He shares with them His exalted work 
of renewing, blessing, sanctifying and glorifying 
lost creatures. He shares with them also His 
authority, His power, His honor, His joy in this 
work. And this He is able to do because they 
have entered into a fellowship with Him in His 
thoughts and intentions by the operation of the 
Holy Ghost; because the spirit of Christ, God’s 
perfect servant, animates them; because His 
mind is also their mind; and because the holy 
will of a self-denying, self-devoted love is alive 
and strongin their hearts. For this reason, they 
will have nothing to do with partizanship. It 
sickens them to see poor lost souls clinging t¢ 
them and wishing to make them masters alongside 
of Christ, or in His place; to see people following 
their directions, and exalting their merely human 
and personal peculiarities into a standard of 


76 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





might alsoy which to regulate their conduct. 
of accomnedings they repel, and they strive 
here the cr might instead to fasten souls upon 
under th their only master. The higher God 
diffes them, the more intent are they on being 
trning, and passing for nothing, in themselves. 
fhen and thus the Church of God is built up in 
truth. 

2. This Church is God’s field.—This truth con- 
troverts all party action in the same way that the 
view just given, of teachers being God’s servants 
and co-laborers, controverts it. The Church be- 
longstoGod; Heit is who tills the field—ezternally, 
by the preaching of the Word—internally, by His 
Spirit. What teachers do is to plant and to water. 
But the word sown is His seed; all the ability 
employed in its first planting and after culture is 
His gift; on Him depends all success. Without 
His blessing, all planting and all watering, how- 
ever skilful and careful, amount to nothing. 
What thus belongs to God is a sacred possession, 
which must be secured for Him. To wish to 
introduce another there as co-possessor is a 
wicked ignoring and contemning of God’s right. 
Indeed, not to acknowledge this right in its entire- 
ness, is virtually to deny it altogether And such 
denial takes place when we adopt human teachers 
as our masters, and follow them, and call our- 
selves by their names. Then God is robbed of 
what is His (Rom. ii. 22). 

ὃ. The Church is God’s house.—Christ the foun- 
dation-stone, laid by Him.—This is the ground and 
measure of all sound teaching. The foundation 
is of Divine worth and of lasting duration. To 
build anything on this, which is not according to 
the mind of Christ, which does not carry the 
impress of His Spirit, which does not spring 
from Him, but which originates in a foreign spi- 
rit, and is the product of human art, or science, or 
opinion—this is to introduce into God’s building 
something, which, however highly it may be es- 
timated by man, is in truth worthless. It can- 
not stand in the day of Goil’s judicial purgation, 
however skillfully we may be able to vindicate it 
on human grounds. When Christ reveals Him- 
self as the One to whom all judgment is given, 
when, by his majesty as Judge, he sifts out and 
destroys everything that is not His, then will 
this be found not proof. The fire of His judge- 
ment will annihilate it. Thus will the work of 
such a person come to naught. He can not be 
honored as one who has assisted in God’s build- 
ing. He cannot confront the Lord his judge with 
joy,—beholding in Him the Rewarder of his 
fidelity. On the contrary, he will shrink back 
in sorrow, pained at the thought of having 
wrought foolishly and to no purpose. Yet with 
all this, he will still have reason to congratu- 
late himself that he may nevertheless snatch 
his soul from the flame which devours his unpro- 
fitable work. Thus it happens that the person 
himself may be saved, while all his doings prove 
worthless. From the common salvation, indeed, 
he may not be excluded, since he held fast to the 
foundation; but he forfeits the glory of being 
accounted a co-worker with God. 

[4. Every believer's work in life awaits a 
searching ordeal, which is to prove its genuine- 
ness. The times of such ordeal are called in 
Scripture ‘days of the Lord.” They occur for 





individuals and for communities all along’ the 
course of human history, and are the preludes to 
a final ‘‘day’’ when the Judge in person shall 
appear to purge His Church—the living temple 
—of all that is corrupt, and to set it up complete 
in the perfection of its beauty. Then will the 
value of each one’s labor be fully manifest. - 
But what the specific means of this ordeal 
will be is a matter of question. Whether it will 
be by literal fire or by some other more spiritual 
instrumentality, of which fire is but a symbol, 
it were hard todetermine. The latter seems the 
more probable in view of the declaration of the 
Baptist that Christ would ‘baptize with the Holy 
Ghost and with fire.’ Such a baptism of puri- 
fication is observable even in this age to some 
degree; yet it is not by material fire. We see the 
chaff of false doctrine and hypocritical perfor- 
mances, consuming and passing out of sight, as 
if perishing in consuming flames, while the 
golden truths of God, wrought out in the expe- 
riences and doings of the true believer, grow 
brighter, and live on to be a blessing to subse- 
quent ages; and who can tell in what way the 
precious shall be taken from the vile at the last 
day? Sufficient to be assured that the ordeal 
will be applied in the most searching manner, 
and that it awaits every member of the Church. 
Judgment is to begin at the House of God.] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Riecer: 1. Mischievous zeal. a. How kin- 
dled? By making too much of diversities of 
gifts in ministers. Here one is blamed if the 
Church be not edified, and there another is 
extolled, if by his preaching the light begins 
to burn more brightly, and people consider not 
that with the one as well as with the other, 
“the increase”? depends on God, and that the 
inequality of results, so far as it lies with 
men, may be attributed not so much to the 
preacher as to the peculiarity of times and 
circumstances. ὁ. How shall such evils be 
guarded against? Safety will be found just in 
proportion as the minister follows the simple 
word of God, and resolves to be nothing, and 
seek nothing for himself; just in proportion as 
he endeavors to improve impartially every thing 
that God sends, without attempting to determine 
prematurely to his own injury what the distine- 
tive importance of it is in the sight of God. 

2. Co-workers with God.—God has chosen 
laborers, a. not because he needs assistance, but 
b. out of his own good pleasure, inasmuch as he 
desires to work on men through men, so that 
each person’s love for the truth, and readiness to 
obey may be more signally manifested. 

8. Caution in building.—a. In building each 
one must take heed not only that he builds on 
the foundation, but that he uses good material 
and builds well. He must speak the truth in 
love, bring sound doctrines into their proper 
connection, employ suitable aids to discourse, 
and learn the art of seizing upon the hearts and 
consciences of men. ὦ. The hearers, too, have 
need of care rightly to improve their advantages, 
since much of the preacher’s success depends 
upon their fidelity in receiving and practising 
what they hear. 





a 


CHAP. III. 5-15. 79 





4. Differences in the superstructure, though resting 
upon the right foundation, are found according as 
a person a. either adheres to that which is closely 
akin to the foundation, selecting that which pro- 
motes the salvation and edification of souls, ὁ. 
or prefers what is alien in character, resorting 


to what pleases men, or promotes his renown, or | 


gratifies a vain curiosity, rather than to what is 
of solid worth and promotes vital godliness. 

5. [Preparation for the final ordeal. If there is 
to be a day of visitation and trial, how important 
to be examining our own work in advance and 
subjecting it to the most rigid tests, lest we be 
overwhelmed at last with utter dismay at our 
loss, and have the mortification of discovering 
too late that we spent our strength for naught, 
and have only our souls for a prey. Ver. 18 ff. ]. 

StarKke:—All good comes from God and must 
be ascribed to him. No boasting. No exalta- 
tion of one at the expense of another (10, 11). 
Not wrong to prefer listening to enlightened and 
regenerated preachers, rather than to such as are 
carnally minded. Wrong comes when amid diver- 
sified gifts in genuine ministers we cleave to one 
and contemn the rest. This is to sin not only 
against those contemned, but also against God. 
This is to evince a lack of just spiritual taste, and 
to bring to the sermon, the ear rather than the 
heart. The preachers office an effective instru- 
mentality for saving souls. The gifts and labors 
of the ministry diversified yet inseparable. One 
plays into the hands of the other. Preaching 
must be followed up. Instrumentalities are 
needed in the spiritual as much as in the temporal 
husbandry. Their efficient power, however, comes 
from God. Itliesin the word as it lies in theseed. 
God works through the word on the heart. (Ver. 
6,7). Be satisfied with planting and watering. 
Should no crop ripen accept it as God’s will. Let 
notthose more richly endowed and occupying more 
elevated positions exalt themselves above those 
holding a lower station. Nor let those below be 
troubled because they arethere. All alike are ser- 
vants of God (2 Cor. xii. 11) (ver. 8). Ministers 
labor with God, not as though associating their 
power with His, but as having His power work- 
ing in them, (by the grace granted them of God, 
ch. xy. 10; 2 Cor. iii. 5 ff.); yet according to the 
degree of culture enjoyed by each one, and also 
according to the native talents possessed which 
the Lord sanctifies (Hedinger). He who wishes to 
have part in the heavenly paradise, must first con- 
sent to form a part of God’s earthly farm, and 
suffer himself to be ploughed, and sowed, and 
reaped (Ver. 9). As a house is not built in a 
day, so neither is the Church. It rises gra- 
dually (Ver. 9). Christ is the foundation, 1. in 
His Person, as God (Col. i. 17), and man, (Acts, iv. 
12), and in both his natures; the whole Church 
(Eph. ii. 20) and each believer is firm only when 
resting on Christ. Yea, since believers are ‘lively 
stones” (1 Pet. ii. 8) and Christ a living foundation, 
all the stones must be supposed to derive their 
life from Him. 2. in doctrine, by means of which 
we are brought to Him as the sole Life-giver 
(Jno. xiv. 6), and by faith are justified, sancti- 
fied and glorified. They who would build a 
church for Christ by insisting only upon a repu- 
table conduct, erect a structure without a founda- 
tion. It must, therefore, fall of itself (Ver. 13). 











Better erect no superstructure and stop with the 
foundation, than to go on piling wood and stub- 
ble. Better simplicity in Christ with a little know- 
ledge, than much learning without Christ, and 
a brain full of the fine spun cobwebs of worldly 
wisdom (Hedinger) (ver. 11). Fire tests and 
destroys. By the cross, by persecutions, by 
death through the judgment it will be shown what 
is wheat and what chaff, what is a pithy saying 
and what the dry lifeless conception of some 
subtle logician or wrangler of the schools (Hed- 
inger) (ver. 13). 

Hevusner :—The Christian Church is a garden; 
ministers the gurdeners. The analogy may be car- 
ried out to the full, both as to labor and depen- 
dence (ver. 6). God’s Spirit has his times and 
seasons for operation (Ver.7). Ministers, how- 
ever various in character and office, have one 
problem to work out, and therefore should 
be harmonious. Hereafter all will enjoy the 
work of all (Ver. 8). What an honor to as- 
sist the Almighty! God’s part in the work, how- 
ever, is the chief thing. If He leaves the field— 
the human heart, waste, it lies eternally waste. 
But He does work on us. And how faithfully 
oftentimes on one single soul! Ministers come 
in as instruments. They work under Him 
upon the field, which has to be broken up by the 
ploughshare of the Law, sown with the seed of 
the Gospel, warmed by the influences of the Holy 
Spirit, and fructified by the dew and rain of di- 
vine grace (Ver. 9). An ordeal is coming. 
Anticipate it. Examine thyself in all that thou 
thinkest, teachest, preachest. Inquire whether 
thou art trusting to thyself for vindication at the 
bar of God (Ver. 13). 

GossNER:—The love we show to ministers 
should be very different from that we show 
to Christ. They only proclaim grace; He bestows 
it. Hence while they are welcomed, He should 
be beloved. With them it isan honor if they 
may only preach, but He saves at the cost of His 
own blood (Ver. 5.) God is so gracious that 
although He is the source of all goodness, yet He 
rewards His servants as if they huu done it all 
(Vers 14): 

[F. W. Ropertson:—The preaching of Christ 
means simply the preaching of Christ. Recol- 
lect what Paul’s Christianity was—how he sums 
allup. ‘*That I might know Him and the power 
of His resurrection,” ete. Settle it in your 
hearts; Christianity is Christ; understand Him, 
breathe His Spirit, comprehend His mind. 
Christianity is a life—a Spirit (Ver.11). There 
is a distinction between the truth of work and 
its sincerity. In that day nothing shall stand 
but what is true; but the sincere worker, even 
of untrue work, shall be saved. Sincerity shall 
save him in that day, but it cannot accredit his 
work (Ver. 15). 

M. Henry:—The ministry is a very useful 
and a very gracious institution; and faithful 
ministers are a great blessing to any people; yet 
the folly and weakness of people may do much 
mischief by what is in itself a blessing]. 

[Ver. 5. If Paul and Apollos were nothing but 
servants, and refused the position of party lead- 
ers, how much more should this modesty appear 
in their successors. Who will arrogate the honors 
in a church which a Paul declines ?] 


80 


[J. Saurin. 11-15:—The different methods of 
preachers. 1. The occasion of these words, as 
shown in the Epistle. II. The design of the 
Apostle,—to rectify our judgments in regard to 
three different classes of preachers; a. such as 
preach the word of man not only different from, 
but directly opposite to the word of God (ver. 
11); δ. such as preach the pure word of God free 
from human admixtures (ver. 12); 6. such as in- 
deed make the word of God the ground of their 
preaching, but mix with it the explications and 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


---------  -τ-------.--. 


traditions of men (ver. 1239). III. Explain the 
metaphors. a. Christ, the foundation. 6. Gold, 
silver, and precious stones—doctrines sublime, 
excellent, demonstrable. ὁ. Wood, hay and stub- 
ble—doctrines: less considerable, uncertain, un- 
important. d. The revelation by fire—the ex- 
amination and disclosures of the last judgment, 
not the destruction of Jerusalem, nor the fire 
of purgatory. IV. Application—in what man- 
ner i are to regard the three classes of minis- 
ters]. 


VI. 


—THE RUPTURE OF THE CHURCH BY PARTY SPIRIT PROVOKES HEAVY JUDG- 

MENT. THE RENUNCIATION OF OUR OWN WISDOM THE CONDITION OF TRUE 
WISDOM. THE LOFTY TITLE OF CHRISTIANS TO ALL THE INSTRUMENTALITIES 
AND MEANS OF SALVATION. 


CuartTerR III. 16-23. 


Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, [God’s temple'] and that the Spirit of 
God dwelleth in you? If any man defile [destroy] the temple of God, him? shall God 
destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are [of which sort are ye]. Let 
no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world * let him 
become a fool, that he may be [become] wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness 
with God: for it is written, He [that] taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And 
again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. Therefore let no 
man glory in men: for all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or 
the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are [om. are*] 


yours; And ye are Christ’s; and Christ 7s God’s. 


1 Ver. 16.—[“ God’s ” should stand first as in the Gr. to mark the emphasis]. 


2 Ver. 17.—Tovrov. 


Lach., Tisch., and others read αὐτόν according to many and in part weighty authorities [A. Ὁ. F. 


Syr.J]. Meyer: “τοῦτον, because after εἴ τις in the protasis αὐτόν is most usually employed, and it was corrected to this as 
more usual.” [So Alf., Words, and others following B. C. L. Cod. Sin.]. 

3 Ver, 18.—|The proper order is, ‘If any one thinketh to be wise among you in this world.” See exegesis]. 

4 Ver. 17.---ἐστιν is to be omitted according to preponderant authorities [A. B. C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[‘‘He passes to another argument against the 
sin of ranging themselves in opposite factions 
under human leaders, particularly such as cor- 
rupt the essential purity and fundamental 
soundness of the spiritual fabric of the Church.” 
Worps. ]. 

Ver. 16. Know ye not that ye are God’s 
temple ?—It will hardly do to connect these 
words directly with the preceding—if for no 
other reason than simply because the threat of 
destruction made in the following verse stands in 
direct contradiction to the promise of salvation 
there held forth, showing that Paul has a new 
case in mind. [Olshausen, however, regards the 
Apostle as simply intensifying and carrying out 
still further his previous figure. The edifice is 
now spoken of as God’s temple, and the guilt of 
desecrating or injuring the building by intro- 
ducing incoherent materials into its structure 
is enhanced in proportion. And still further, the 
taught as well as the teachers are also here 
brought into view. So substantially Hodge, Alf., 





Stanley; Calvin says more correctly: ‘ Having 
admonished the teachers as to their duty, he 
now addresses himself to the pupils’]. Οὐκ 
οἴδατε: know ye not? This phrase is not to 
be confounded with ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε: or know ye 
not?—and it might very well serve to introduce 
a new turn of thought, indirectly suggested 
by what precedes. Thus far, Paul bas contem- 
plated the Church as a building belonging to 
God, and has exhibited the great responsibility 
attendant on the work of erecting it, after the 
only proper foundation has been laid. Now he 
describes its sacred character more, fully by 
likening it to a temple inhabited by God’s Spirit, 
the violation of which incurs condign punish. 
ment. By the question: Know ye not? he ap- 
peals directly to the consciousness of Christians 
and intimates to his readers that in that spirit of 
partisanship which they cherished and which was 
so destructive to the integrity of the Church, there 
was a strange and criminal obscuration of true 
Christian feeling, inasmuch as they were conduct- 
ing themselves just as if they possessed it not, 
and knew not what belonged to their profession. 
In the objective clause the emphasis lies on 


CHAP. III. 16-23. 


8. 





temple (να ός), marking an advance upon the 
more indefinite term, building, used before. ναός, 
according to its derivation, (vaiw) means in- 
deed a building in general. But the Greeks used 
the word only to denote the dwellings of gods, 
and especiaily that room where the image stood. 
[‘*vadc is more holy than iepév.”” Worps.]. Here 
it denotes the spiritual sanctuary, the place where 
the true God reveals His presence, and bestows 
blessings, and is worshipped, forming one com- 
plete whole, and consisting of all such as carry 
in themselves the Spirit of God. This appears 
from the explanatory clause following—and 
(και explicative) that the Spirit of God 
dwells in you.—Hence Christians are called 
‘a spiritual house” (1 Pet. ii. 5), also ‘‘a habi- 
tation of God through the Spirit” (Eph. ii. 22); 
comp. also 2 Cor. vi. 16 ff.; Rom. viii. 9, 11; 2 
Tim. i. 14; Ez. xxxvii. 27, etc. οἰκεῖν, to reside 
permanently (comp. Jno. xiv. 23.) The words év 
ὑμῖν, in you (not, ‘among you’), refers, like the 
statement: ‘ye are the temple,’ to the Church, 
or to individual believers, not, however in uheir 
separate capacity, but in their organic conn “- 
tion. Here the law of all organization obtains 
that every organ is a complete whole in itself. 
As Christendom unitedly is a ‘‘temple of Zod,”’ so 
is also every Christian congregation az 1 every 
individual Christian. 
understood and apprehended o:1ly in its ; arts, so 
are the parts to be understood nly as connected 
in the whole. The translation: ‘the temple of 
God’ is by no means needed foi the sake of set- 
ting aside the idea of a plurality of temples. We 
can employ the rendering: ‘a temple of God,’ sim- 
ply as signifying the kind of building implied. 
[Meyer on the contrary more justly says: “ναὸς 
Yeov is the temple of God, not a temple, for Paul 
does not conceive of the various churches as va- 
rious temples of God, which would be inconsistent 
with the Jew’s conceptica of God’s temple; but 
of each Christian church as in a mystic sense 
the temple of Jehovah. So there are not many 
temples, but one only, and many churches, each 
one of which is ideally the same temple of God.” 
So Stanley and Alford]. 

Ver. 17. If any one destroy the temple 
of God, him will God destroy.—This is the 
first clause in an inference which rests upon the 
undoubted recognition of the inviolability of the 
temple of God, as maintained also in the Jewish 
Scriptures. All injuring, or desecrating, or even 
disturbing the sanctuary of God’s manifested 
presence, was deemed a sacrilege, which incurred 
the Divine vengeance. This is strongly indicated 
by the immediate succession of the same word in 
the two forms, φϑείρει and φϑερεῖ. ‘If any the 
temple of God destroyeth, destroy him shall God.” 
See a like case in Rey. xxii. 18. The punishment 
here implied as related to the old temple was that 
of temporal death. Used, however, in relation to 
the spiritual temple, the word, in the first in- 
stance, signifies the rupturing of the Church by 
violent partisanship, which must finally end in its 
entire dissolution’; and in the second instance, as 
indicating the consequent punishment, it denotes 
exclusion from salvation (απώλεια). [Stanley 
says that ‘‘ φϑείρειν, in the LXX. and in the New 
Testament, seems to have lost the sense of ‘defile,’ 
end merely to retain that of ‘mar’ or ‘ destroy.’” 


6 





But as the whole is to be | 
| ing of reverence and a holy communion of Spi- 











And so Hodge, who says ‘‘the passage may be 
rendered ‘If any man injure the temple of God, 
him will God injure.’” Olshausen goes stil] 
further: ‘*The connection shows that the word 
cannot be understood of absolute destruction. 
Probably the Apostle chose the strong word only 
on account of its having been used just before for 
the purpose of intimating that God would requite 
like with like.” But such modification of its 
plain meaning is certainly contrary to the paral- 
lel which the Apostle introduces. The violater 
of the sanctuary of the ancient temple was un- 
questionably punished with death. And to pre- 
serve the analogy, we ought to maintain the 
word φϑείρειν in its original signification ]. 

Next follows the proof with the application of 
the penal principle just stated to the case in hand. 
—For the temple of God is holy.—It lies 
in the very idea of a temple that it is holy 
and inviolable, and that therefore all injury done 
to it is a crime.—And of this sort are ye— 
οἵτεινές ἐστε ὑμεῖς boric refers to the ob- 
ject generally as one of a class, and not definitely, 
thus serving to render a proposition general; 
here it means: of which sort, wiz, ‘holy.” 
The antecedent here is not ‘‘temple,’’ but the 
odjective ‘‘holy.”** That they were the temple 
of God he had already asserted in ver. 16. 
‘Recurring to ch. i. 1 he hereby awakens a feel- 


rit in opposition to that unworthy servility en- 
gendered by a divisive regard for human authori: 
ties.” OstANDER. [‘‘ Meyer well remarks that 
this clause is the minor proposition of a syllo- 
gism: Whoever mars the temple of God, him 
will God destroy, because His temple is holy: 
but ye are are also holy as His spiritual temple: 
therefore whoever mars you shall be destroyed 
by God.” Axnrorp]. 

Ver. 18. The Apostle now proceeds to point 
out the real source of the mischief he rebukes. 
The rupture of the unity of the Church by a party 
spirit, sprang from a pride of knowledge, and a 
vain conceit of that wisdom which belonged to 
this world, and not toGod’s kingdom, This was 
especially the case with the party of Apollos, 
which the Apostle seems chiefly to have in his 
eye, throughout this chapter. As it took pride 
in Apollos, because of his dialectic and rhetorical 
skill and learning, and clung to these qualities 
in him, so also did it seek to imitate his manner, 
and signalized itself for laying a great stress 
upon secular wisdom, and for no little conceit in 
that respect. This tendency Paul denounces as 
unfounded in truth, and unsuited to such as strive 
for the kingdom of God. In his view it involves 
a self-deception, more or less gross, against 
which he felt constrained to warn them.—Let 
no one deceive himself.—The deception here 
consisted in a person’s imagining himself to pos- 
sess a profound insight into the truth and ways 
of God, when in fact he was utterly devoid of it, 
yea, was involved in entire misapprehension and 
gross blindness in reference toit. Such delusion 
passes away only when all conceit of wisdom is 





[* Hodge prefers the rendering of the E. V. which follows 
that of all the previous English versions, as well as the Sy- 
riac, Vulgate and Luther’s. And this rendering is sustained 
by Jelf. Gr. Gram. ὃ 816.7, ? 821.3. The plural in οἵτινες 
is to be explained on the principle of attraction.] 


82 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—CCe? er ee — ————S__—_—sjw 0008.86. eee 


given up, and a person is willing to be regarded 
a fool, or consents to renounce all secular wis- 
dom in the exercise of that simple faith which 
he before had regarded as folly, and which passes 
for folly with the world. And this is what the 
Apostle requires when he says:—If any one 
thinketh to be wise among you in this 
world, let him become a fool that he may 
be wise.—Aoxeiv may mean either: to think, or 
to appear; hence the clause may here be trans- 
lated, ‘‘if any one passes for a wise man, either in 
his own estimation,’’ or ‘‘in others’ estimation.” 
The former rendering is best sustained by what 
has been said before. Hence the exhoration, “let 
him become a fool,’’ must be understood as re- 
lating to his own, and not to others’ judgment, 
and in such a way that either the words παρ᾽ 
ἑαυτῷ, in his own esteem, shall besupplied; or 
that the person be regarded as passing over to a 
standpoint, which had until then appeared to 
him and to others like-minded as folly. The 
latter sense best suits the word. [And here it 
must be borne in mind that this renunciation of 
our own wisdom, or of the world’s wisdom, is 
required because all such wisdom is one only in 
appearance, and not in reality. It is its intrin- 
sic worthlessness that renders it discreditable]. 
The phrase ‘in this world,” lit. ‘in this age,” 
is not to be united with the clause following, [as 
Origen, Chrysostom, Luther, Rosenmuller] as 
though it meant, ‘let him become a fool in this 
world;”* the order of the words forbids this. But 
it belongs to ‘wise,’ as designating the sphere 
where this wisdom prevails; g. d. ‘wise in this 
world’ (comp. ver. 19). [AIf. following Meyer 
says: ‘it belongs not simply to ‘wise,’ but to the 
whole clause going before; to the whole assump- 
tion of wisdom made by the man, which as made 
in this present world, must be false; ‘ for,” adds 
Meyer, ‘‘those very persons who thought to be- 
come eminent among Christians through their 
wisdom in this premessianic period, when the 
knowledge of Divine things is yet in its infancy, 
and exceedingly limited, were not really wise, but 
were ensnared by their own self-decit.” Such a 
limitation, however, of the meaning of the word 
aiwv, age, here is very questionable. It is plain 
from the following verse, that‘‘this age” is to be 
interpreted not temporally, but qualitatively, as 
synonymous with “this world” (xécyoc)]. Ἔν 
ὑμῖν, among you, designates the sphere in which 
the person supposed hopes to shine by his wis- 
dom. 

Vers. 19, 20. Sustain the previous exhorta- 
tion, and shows that in becoming a fool a person 
but coincides with God’s judgment.—For the 
wisdom of this world is foolishness with 
God —As such, therefore, it deserves to be cast 
aside. ‘*Wisdom of this world” (κόσμος), comp. 
i. 21; ii. 6. ‘It is a wisdom ruled by the spirit 
of this world that oversteps its proper bounds, 
seeks to satisfy itself about divine and human 
things, is tainted with error, and therefore stands 
in direct opposition alike to the highest reason, 
and to God, and to great objects for which the 
world and man were created (ywpia).’’ OSIANDER. 
[παρὰ τῷ ϑεῷ---παρά is used with the Dative ‘to 
express standing before a person as a judge, and 
submitting to his decision or sentence.” Hence 
the expression ‘before God’ carries a deeper 


meaning than simply ‘in his sight.’ God has 
passed upon it and condemned it.]—The proof 
of this.—For it is written, ‘He taking 
the wise in their own craftiness.’’—This 
passage is cited from Job v. 13, and is a part of 
the speech of Eliphas. It accords with the ori- 
ginal text, and agrees in sense with the Septua- 
gint. [The phraseology of the latter, however, 
is changed for stronger terms. δρασσόμενος, 
catching tor καταλαμβάνων, tuking and πανουργίᾳ, 
craftiness for φρονήσει, prudence]. The sentence 
is incomplete, since Paul quotes only the words 
suited to his purpose, omitting those on which 
these grammatically depend. Hence they need no 
supplement. Human wisdom, art, cunning are 
here stated to be incapable of standing before 
the wisdom of God, since God catches these who 
rely on these aids, in their own craftiness, and 
the very excellencies on which they pride them- 
selves, are turned into a snare through which 
they are entrapped. By thus causing them to be 
destroyed by their own devices, God shows them 
up to be nothing less than the veriest fools. This 
citation, the only one in the Néw Testament, 
taken from the book of Job, like much which 
Eliphas spoke, belongs to that wisdom which 
uttereth her voice in the streets, and is marked 
as here with the stamp of Divine truth.—_And 
again.—' The Lord knoweth the thoughts 
of the wise that they are vain.’—This se- 
cond passage, taken from Ps. xciv. 11, was ori- 
ginally directed against those proud contemners 
of God, who acted as if there were no God above, 


observing and noting down all their unrighteous - 


deeds. In accordance with the object he has in 
view, Paul here employs the word ‘the wise,” 
instead of ‘‘men,” as it stands both in the origi- 
nal Heb. and in the Sept. But this is no arbi- 
trary alteration, since the whole Psalm treats of 
those vain sophists, who pride themselves on 
their perverse and groundless notions respecting 
God. Διαλογισμοί in Hellenic speech, was used 
to denote all those capricious reasonings and re- 
flections which either opposed Divine truth or 
tended to render it doubtful, comp. Rom. i. 21; 
Eph. iv. 17. Μάταιοι, groundless, void of truth, 
therefore, counter to wisdom, and belonging to 
folly. Whether this word in the original belongs 
to the wise themselves, or to their reasonings, is 
questionable. The essential meaning is the same 
in either case. [‘‘It appears from these two verses 
thus placed in juxtaposition, that St. Paul fol- 
lowed the LXX., but uses his own discretion in 
doing so, and sometimes substitutes for it a trans- 


lation approaching more nearly the original.” 


Worps. 1. 

Vers. 21-23. From all this a warning is de- 
rived.—So then—déore.—[‘‘ This word is used 
by St. Paul to introduce the summing up and 
conclusion of his argument here and elsewhere 
in this Epistle, iii. 7; iv. 5; viii. 88; xi. 88; xiv. 
89; xv. 58.”"—Worps.] It serves even in clas- 
sical writers to introduce an imperative clause 
when this follows upon another which contains 
the reason why such command is given. (Comp. 
Passow, ii. 2.) [Also Winer, WY. 7., Gr. Pt. 
iii. 5, note 1; also Jelf. Gr. Gram., 3 867, 1].— 
Let no one glory in men.—That is, so 
far as they set up for themselves, and rely 
on their natural powers—not as possessed of 


CHAP. III. 16--28, 





spiritual giftsand becauseof such. In the latter 
case the boasting would be in the Lord. The 
caution is addressed to those who are inclined 
to make much of men in consequence of their 
education or supposed wisdom, cleaving to them 
in partisan attachment, and disparaging other 
servants of Christ in comparison, to the over- 
looking of the unity of the Church. Such per- 
sons are guilty of putting the highest value on 
what is merely a natural advantage. And all 
such should be avoided by reflecting, that the 
wisdom of this world is folly with God. For 
this there was an additional reason:—For all 
things are yours.—Here he exhibits to us 
the dignity of Christians, [in contrast with the 
world and its folly], as persons who, by virtue 
of their union with Christ and, through Him, 
with God, are precluded from dependence on 
men, and have a direct claim on every thing 
which belongs to God and Christ, so that all things 
serve their advantage and promote their exalted 
destiny (Rom. viii. 28)—even as all things are 
compelled to serve Christ (Matth. xxi. 38; xxvii. 
60; xi. 27). As Neander well says: ‘‘The so- 
vereignty over the world was indeed conferred 
on man in his original, estate. But this, 
being lost through sin, was restored again by 
redemption. The spirit which is bestowed 
on Christians, carries in itself a principle 
which every thing must eventually obey, and 
which will subjugate the world ever more and 
more, until at last the promise, that ‘the meek 
shall inherit the earth,’ is fulfilled, and the world 
has become the theatre of the Divine kingdom.” 
From the drift of the passage we may see the 
utter groundlessness of Billroth’s view, who sup- 
poses the warning here to be addressed to 
teachers, cautioning them against boasting on 
account of their partisans. In such a case, we 
should be obliged to interpret ‘yours’ of the 
teachers, which would be impossible. It is to 
the Church in general that Paul is here speaking. 
Instead of glorying with a one-sided partiality, 
in the fact that this or that person belonged to 
them as their master, he would have them main- 
tain a blessed consciousness of the privilege, 
that all things and persons belonged to them 
alike. 

What in particular these things were, he 
goes on to specify, beginning with the teach- 
ers whom they had made the occasion of 
their strifes—Whether Paul, or Apollos 
or Cephas.—(Comp. 2 Cor. iv. 5.) Sach 
one of these they were all to turn to their own 
advantage, instead of adhering to any one ex- 
clusively. Here he could not add, ‘or Christ,” 
for this would be to reduce Christ to the same 
footing with his servants. The Christ-party do not 
come into view here, and could not, ‘‘since their 
relation to the Apostles was only a negative one” 
(comp. on 1. 12).—or the world.—‘‘This leap 
from Peter to the whole world gives a sudden 
breadth to the discourse, as if he were borne 
on with a sort of impatience to set forth 
his theme in its fullest scope.”—BenaEL. Comp. 
Rom. viii. 38. There is here neither a climax, 
as if he were proceeding upward from the lowest 
point, nor an argument from the less to the 
greater, [as Calvin, when he says: ‘‘If Christ has 
subjected to you also the world and life and 





83 





death, how much more men, so that they should 
serve rather than rule you?’”’] Nor is the term 
‘world’ to be understood as denoting: ‘the 
university of the learned;’ nor yet: ‘the know- 
ledge of all natural things’ wherein the learned 
boast; nor: ‘unbelieving teachers as contrasted 
with the aforementioned believing ones;’ nor: ‘all 
the rest of mankind,’ But the word is to be 
taken in its most comprehensive sense; Chris- 
tians, who are the destined ‘‘heirs of the world” 
(Rom. iv. 88), haye even now a claim upon the 
world. It belongs to them. Itmust serve them. 
Yet in order not to make the term synonymous 
with the expression: ‘all things” (ver. 21) we 
shall have to limit it (with Osiander) to mean 
the visible world, with a special reference to 
mankind dwelling init. [‘*The present order of 
things,” says Hodge, “418 maintained and di- 
rected to the promotion of the great work of 
redemption.” And Barnes well expands the 
thought, ‘the world is yours,’ under four par- 
ticulars: (1) The world was made by the common 
Father, and all His children have an interest in 
it as His work. (2) The frame of the universe is 
sustained ,and upheld for their sake. (3) The 
course of providential events is ordered for their 
welfare. (4) They have the promise of as much 
of this world as is needful for them (Matth, vi. 
33; Mark x. 29, 30; 1 Tim. iv. 8)]. With this 
view the following members of the sentence best 
accord.—There we have indicated the most mo- 
mentous states and changes belonging to this 
visible sphere.—or life, or death.—The former 
expresses the fullest exercise of all our vital ener- 
gies in all its varied influence and bearings; the 
latter denotes the entire suppression of this 
activity. And both these must promote the ad- 
vantage of believers and help onward their sal- 
vation. [‘* They are dispensed and administered 
so as best to fulfil the designs of God in reference 
to the Church. The greatest men of the world, 
kings, statesmen and heroes, ministers, indivi- 
dual believers and unbelievers, live and die just 
as best subserves the interest of Christ’s king- 
dom.”—Honpaer. ‘‘Life is yours’: (1) Because 
believers enjoy it. It is areal life, not vain show. 
(2) Because its various events tend to promote 
their welfare and work together for their good.” 
‘<«Death is yours’: (1) Because believers have 
peace and support in their dying hour. (2) Be- 
cause it is the avenue which leads to their rest, 
(3) Because they should triumph over it, in that 
it will be swallowed up in the glory of a higher 
life, releasing us from what is mortal to put on 
immortality.””—Barnes. ]—Or things present 
or things to come.—These terms alike refer 
to the present life, and include all its vicissitudes 
from the passing moment onward, whether joy- 
ful or sorrowful.—All are yours.—A summing 
up and emphatic reassertion of what he opened 
with. And from this he passes on to state the 
ground on which Christians possess such wealth. 
But ye are Christ’s.—[‘‘Here the category 
changes; Christ is not yours in the sense in 
which ‘all things’ are—not made for and sub- 
serving you—but (dé) you are His.”—A.rorD]. 
It is this fact which gives to believers their royal 
power over all creaturely existences. By par- 
taking in Christ’s redemption, they once more 


attain unto a dignity which originally belonged 


84 


4 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ; 





to man (Gen. i. 26; Ps. viii. 6) and which is 
promised God’s people (Ex. xix. 6). And this is 
a dignity far transcending all that ever was sur- 
mised by Pagans or is expressed in their most 
famous sayings—such as: ‘the wise alone are 
kings—are rich—are free. ‘The analogousness 
of such language to that of the New Testament 
indicates the remaining traces of the nobility of 
human nature; but without Gospel redemption 
the dignity of man thus set forth would be wholly 
unrealized. Antiquity planted itself upon self- 
exaltation, Christianity on self- humiliation.” — 
NeanperR. (Comp. ii. 15; 1 Jno. v. 1; Rev. iii. 
21; 1 Pet. ii. 9). By belonging to Christ, the 
Church and all its true members become parta- 
kers of his glory as the One to whom all things 
have been given by the Father. In their fellow- 
ship with Him—a fellowship involving entire 
dependence on their part—they are made inde- 
pendent of all else, and all else stands at their ser- 
vice. By the fact expressed in: ‘‘ye are Christ’s,” 
all partizanship is cut off, all generic differences 
are dissolved, and a proper relation to all teachers 
established. Meyer says finely that the active 
relation of possession mentioned in ver. 22 (‘all 
things are yours’) and the passive relation of 
being possessed here brought out (‘ ye are Christ’s’) 
are both alike opposed to the disorders arising 
from subservience to human authorities. We 
may, perhaps, detect here a slight intimation 
intended for the Christ party, that in their par- 
tisan appeal to Christ there was an ignoring of 
that connection which all alike sustained to 
Him, and a disparaging levelling of their Lord to 
an equality with human leaders.—But Christ 
is God's.—[‘‘ And even being Christ’s does not 
reach the highest possession: He possesses you 
not for Himself, but (dé, again) the head of Christ) 
is God,” (xi. 3),—AxForp.] Thus it is shown 
that by belonging to Christ we indirectly belong 
to God, and are planted upon an immovable basis 
of independence and power (comp. Jno. x. 28-30). 
And so, on the one hand, we see our union to God 
to be mediated by Christ, and, on the other, that 
Christ is subordinated to the Father, as shown 
in xi. 3. To consider this subordination however 
as belonging solely to His human nature, would 
not accord with a correct view of the whole sub- 
ject. Itis the whole Christ that is here spoken of, 
and that too not simply as in His state of humilia- 
tion, but also in His state of glory (comp. xv. 28; 
Phil. ii. 9). In His essential equality with God, 
Heis at the same time subordinated to God (comp. 
Jno. v. 23-26; xiv, 28; xvii. 8). [‘*There is,” 
says Alford, ‘‘a striking similarity in the argu- 
ment in this last verse to that in our Lord’s pro- 
hibition, Matth. xxiii. 8-10, ‘But be not ye called 
Rabbi, for one is your Master, even Christ; and 
call no man your father upon earth, for one is 
your Father, who is in heayen.’’’]. ‘‘This last 
clause gives to the whole course of thought a 
most exalted close, and to the argument presented 
its strongest and noblest foundation, and rounds 
off the whole paragraph by a most fitting allusion 
to the idea of the one holy temple of God with which 
it opened (ver. 16, comp. ver. 9), in order to 
show Christians that by virtue of their union to 
God through Christ they are really taught of 
God.”’—OsIANDER. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The sacredness and inviolability of the Church. 
It is God’s temple. If so, then it is the place of 
His gracious presence—His sanctuary, to be 
treated with tender reverence and awe. To in- 
troduce strange fire (Lev. x. 1, 2) into it is a 
sacrilege which incurs the heaviest judgment, 
even an exclusion from the communion of saints, 
Of this crime they are guilty who bring into the 
Church some other authority than that of God’s 
word, and pin their faith to something else than 
that which God has given, and prize another 
wisdom beside that which is in Christ. By such 
conduct the Church is desecrated, and robbed of © 
its true character as the temple of God. In fact 
it is as such destroyed. And this occurs when- 
ever party spirit prevails. In such a case man’s 
word and wisdom usurp the place of God’s word 
and wisdom. Then adhesion to some particular 
human leader is made a test of Christianity and 
a condition of brotherhood. Then Christ, ‘*who 
of God is made unto us wisdom,” efc., (1 Cor. i. 
80), is crowded out of His supremacy. In place 
of this one holy image of God, the only proper 
pattern for believers, there comes in the idol of 
some human personality to be copied as the true 
standard of character, and this not for the sake of 
any resemblance it may bear to Christ, but for the 
sake of some natural peculiarities it may happen 
to possess. Instead of the flame of a holy love kin- 
dled by the Spirit and warming toward all, there 
burns the flre of human partialities, which be- 
gets alienation and hostility towards all who do 
not cherish like preferences ; and when such are 
the results of party spirit, it must be seen that 
he who engenders or furthers this spirit mars the 
work of God, and desecrates His sanctuary. And 
can such a person hope to escape condign pun- 
ishment from Him who is thus insulted in His 
own temple? 

2. The Christian’s regal glory in its nature and 
grounds. ‘‘All things are yours and ye are 
Christ’s, and Christ’s is God’s.” Since God is 
love itself, He keeps nothing for Himself, but 
imparts to others all—yea, His very Being in the 
fulness of its perfections and blessedness. This 
He does in an original and eternal way within 
the sphere of the Godhead, to his only-begot- 
ten Son, who, by virtue of this communication, 
is, has, and can do every thing the same as the 
Father. He does it also in an indirect manner 
towards all creatures made in His image, accord- 
ing to their measure. Hence the appointment of © 
man to lordship in his own province. [This 
lordship he indeed lost by reason of sin, and be- 
came the slave of the circumstances which he 
ought to have ruled. But in the work of re- 
demption it has been restored to him through 
the interposition of this Son, who became the 
second Adam, and, in His assumed humanity, re- 
established this supremacy for all who should 
believe on Him. ‘‘Fear not,’ He says to His 
own, ‘for I have overcome the world.” Hence 
it is] in Christ that we see this appointment to 
Lordship actually fulfilled; and how it was ful- 
filled may be seen, both during His life of humil- 
iation, when He controlled all things by the word 


CHAP. III. 16-23. 


85 





of His power, and in His exaltation to universal 
power and authority at the right hand of God 

In this power believers are now invited to share 
by union with Him. Through Him the whole crea- 
tion stands subject to their disposal. Every 
thing He has is made to subserve the purposes of 
His love in them and promote their sanctification 
and glory. 

But since now, for a period, their life is, to a 
certain degree, hid with Christ in God, so also 
is their power. Nevertheless this power is to 
be experienced even here in striking ways, and 
ever more and more through the prevalence of 
their prayers. And the terms on which they re- 
ceive it show the ground on which it rests, wz.: 
the fellowship had with Christ, and through 
Him with God. Prevailing prayers are such as 
are offered in the name of Christ or according to 
the will of God (Jno. xiv. 13 f.; xvii. 23; 1 Jno, 
ii. 14), or as are presented in faith (Matth. xvii. 
20). In them there is an identifying of ourselves 
with God through Christ, so that all private pre- 
ferences are given up, and we keep ourselves in 
exclusive dependence on Him. Besides, as in 
Christ Himself there was manifested this same 
demeanor towards the Father; as He, the Di- 
vinely equal Son, kept Himself in perfect de- 
pendence on God, and determined to be nothing 
else but the revealer and executor of the Fath- 
er’s will; as He, the first man, was obliged to 
qualify Himself for the exercise of Divine power 
in the way of obedience,—just so it is with be- 
lievers. Their voluntary and complete dependence 
on Christ and through Him on God is the condition 
and source of their all embracing power. The 
fact that they belong to Him is the ground that 
all things belong to them. 

[8. All sound title and right to use the crea- 
tures of God, together with the ability to use 
them to advantage, are conditioned on fuith in 
Christ. He, having by His. obedience recovered 
for man his lost sovereignty, makes those who 
believe on Him joint heirs with Him to this in- 
heritance. And He also imparts to them that 
purity by which all things are pure to them. 
Hence to them every creature of God is good, 
when received with thanksgiving and sanctified 
with the word of God and prayer. And in the 
ordering of His providence all things are made 
to work together for their good. Not so is it 
with the wicked. A kind of natural right to 
possession and use they may indeed have in the 
present condition of things; but—it is under 
God’s toleration and only for a time. If they 
continue unbelieving to the last, they are finally 
despoiled of all. While even in this life the good 
they seem to have is no real good, and ‘‘nothing 
is pure, since even their very mind and con- 
science is defiled.”” This is what Origen seems 
to teach. ‘‘All things helong to the saint. The 
whole world is the possession of faith. But the 
unbeliever has no claim to even an obolus; for the 
goods which he has he holds as a robber, since 
he knows neither how to use them nor yet the 
God that made them.” (Taken in substance from 
Wordsworth) ]. 

4. [Christ is God’s. On the subordination 
of Christ to the Father, see on viii. 6 and 
xi. 3]. 











HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


SrarKke:—To be ‘the temple of God,” inhab- 
ited by the Holy Spirit, is the highest dignity of 
Christians. It ennobles the humblest to a great~ 
ness that far surpasses all secular honor and 
glory. The Spirit dwellsin us: 1, through faith 
in Christ; 2, through peace with God; ὃ, through 
hope; 4, through love; 5, through special gifts 
and powers; 6, through comfort, cheer, patience, 
joy in the cross; 7, through true life in the soul, 
continuing even when it passes out of the body, 
which itself also partakes of this life, whether it 
be in this or in the future state, (Selnecker) ver. 
16.—How fearful the woe which awaits those whe 
mislead and destroy souls, either by false doc- 
trines or by an ungodly life (ver. 17).—*+ Let him 
becomeafool.’? Whataparadox! A foolfirst—then 
wise! The world seeksto be wise and then becomes 
foolish. But what is this ‘“‘becoming a fool?” 
Not the losing of our understanding and will, 
[but the confession of ignorance, the avowal of 
our knowing nothing, that we may be willingtobe © 
taught, so as truly to know every thing] (ver. 18). 
—God sometimes lets ‘‘the wise” run their 
course, accumulate their knowledge, construct 
their cunning systems, so as at last to be caught as 
in a snare by their own devices, and be the more 
thoroughly convinced of their folly. [Few areso 
profoundly sensible of the incompetency of the 
human intellect and the meagreness of human 
attainments as those who have most profoundly 
and honestly explored and discussed the great 
problems of nature, humanity and God] (ver. 
19). The Church is not for the teachers, that i 
should be subject to them and called by their 
names; but ¢hey are for it, to serve zs welfare 
and build zt up. Hence no man or set of men 
has power over Christians to prescribe laws for 
them and bind their consciences. Let no one 
therefore choose a mere man for his guiding star 
unconditionally, or follow his lead blindly; much 
less should any one count himself blessed in having 
adopted this one rather than that as the control- 
ler of his life and conscience. Nor yet let him 
provoke dissensions and divide the Church by 
asserting his partialities to an undue extent 
(ver. 21).—‘‘All things are yours”’—f[all true 
Christian teachers of every name, whether Paul, 
or Apollos, or Cephas, or Calvin, or Wesley, or 
Leighton, or Fuller. Every faithful minister 
profits the whole Church; and every member of 
the Church may and ought to derive benefit from 
the teachings of all. It is thus the mind is ex- 
panded beyond party limits into a true Catholi- 
city]. And ‘this world,”—sun, air, water, fire, 
earth, all stand at your service, and ye can use 
them and praise the Creator forthem. Your natu. 
ral ‘‘life,”’ too, preserved by this world’s goods, [is, 
while preserved, for your advantage, even though 
it may be passed amid pains, and privations, 
and disabilities, that seem worse than death]. Fi- 
nally, ‘‘death”’ is yours, as it opens an entrance 
into eternal blessedness and glory (ver. 22).— 
‘Ye are Christ’s.’ He has bought you with His 
blood, and is your proper Lord and Master. He 
is the Head—you, the members. Hence cleave to 
Him only. Be called after him only. ‘Christ 


80 





is God’s,” as the appointed Mediator and Am- 
bassador of God to men. Jikewise, as Head 
of the Church, He became obedient unto death, 
even the death of the cross, and acted ever in 
the Father’s service and to His glory (ver. 23). 

Hrusner:—The indwelling of the Spirit is 
opposed to all party strife. Hence in moments 
of holy inspiration, [in times of religious awaken- 
ing], sectarianism melts, [and the hearts of be- 
lievers of every name flow together], ver. 16.— 
The conceit of our own unimpeachable wisdom 
is self-deceit or self-betrayal (ver. 18).—The 
wisdom which would know nothing of God and 
would discard a Saviour, will be finally exposed 
by God in all its nakedness, and all its aims 
baffled and punished (ver. 19).—To be proud 
of our own denomination or of our own leaders 
is nothing but a concealed self-love, which seeks 
to shine in the glory of another. And this is 
derogatory to the Christian name, for the be- 
liever is servant-to no man (ver. 21).—Since all 
things are ours through Christ, all things should 
conduct the Christian to Christ. [Failing in 
this, their use and enjoyment become so far pre- 
judicial and unlawful. They are then not pro- 
perly ‘ours’’]. (ver. 22).—‘* Ye are Christ’s,” 
then ye should serve Him, even as He, the image 
of God, served God in all things and conducted 
all to God (ver. 23.) 

W. F. Besser :—Venr. 18. ‘Be not deceived.” 
Self-deception is an injurious thing; it ren- 
ders much labor useless, and despoils us of our 
reward. But worst of all is that self-betrayal 
which hardens the heart against brotherly ad- 
monition.—‘‘ Let him become a fool.” Such is 
the power and wonder working of God’s word, 
that it moves me to become an enemy to myself; 
and to empty myself of all that which best pleases 
my flesh; and to become a fool in this world, 
to give up the reputation of being a sagaci- 
ous man, who moves on with the party of pro- 
gress, and stands upon the apex of the civiliza- 
tion of the time; and so to pass into obscurity 
and contempt.—(Ver. 19). God weaves a snare 
for the wise out of their own craftiness, wherein 
he catches them while they think to slip from 
Him by their arts: 6. g., explaining away His 
miracles through their rationalism.—(Ver. 21). 
The building here does not belong to the builders 
but the builders to the building.—Ver. 22 as 
compared with i. 12. Christ does not stand in 
the second rank with His servants. He is the 
Lord of Glory. The declaration ‘all is yours” 
promises the world to Christians preéminently 
in this sense, that all secular art and service 
heip to furnish mortar for building the temple 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


= 


of God. Christians are called not to curse the 
world, but to overcome and rule it for God. The 
world is nothing but a scatfolding that will be 
broken up when it has served its end in assisting 
to construct God’s house. But this house, which 
is destined to be eternal, are we.—All this 
world’s wisdom is folly with God, if it insists in 
playing the mistress in His house ; but if it act the 
part of handmaid, it is in its place.—(Ver. 28). 
Though Christ may employ His servants for 
bringing all those who have been purchased by 
His blood to become His by faith; still the saints 
thus called hang upon Christ, independently of 
any man, just as needles are drawn and held by 
the power of the magnet, even though some 
other needle, which had been first attracted. 
should sustain them by virtue of the magnetic 
power streaming through it. 

[Barnes:—Ver. 20. ‘Words of the wise, 
vain.’ This admonition especially applicable to 
ministers. They are in peculiar danger on this 
subject, and it has been by their yielding them- 
selves so much to the power of speculative phil- 
osophy that parties have been formed in the 
Church, and that the Gospel has been so much 
corrupted ]. 

[J. Barrow:—VeEr. 16. The Divinity of the Holy 
Ghost. I. His nature and original—the Spirit 
of God. II. His personality—He dwelleth in us. 
III. His Divinity—Christians are called the tem- 
ple of God because He dwelleth in them. IV. 
His sanctifying virtue—in that he constitutes us 
temples by His presence in us. Application, 1. 
We are obliged to render all adoration to the 
majesty of the Divine Spirit. 2. The considera- 
tion of His presence and work should awaken 
devyoutest gratitude. 8. We should desire and 
pray for God’s Spirit. 4. We should demean 
ourselves worthily toward the Spirit. 5. The 
doctrine full of comfort and encouragement.—J. 
Howe :—Ver. 16. The Christian a living temple, I. 
built, and II. inhabited, by the Holy Ghost.—See 
this whole subject largely discussed in Howe's 
works, pp. 77-113.—R. Soutu :—ver. 19. Worldly 
wisdom. I. Principles: a. Dissimulation in con- 
cealment or false pretences; ὁ. Self-interest as 
opposed to conscience or religion; 6. Self, the 
chief end; d. Allits beneficence and gratitude 
are practiced with an eye to advantage. 11, The — 
folly and absurdity of these principles: a. The 
end pitched upon not suited to man’s condition, 
either as to duration or rational nature; ὁ. The 
means pitched upon are unsuited to his end, in- 
asmuch as they are insufficient ana often contrary 
| to it]. 











- 


CHAP. IV. 1-5. ᾿ 87 
————— Se 


Vil —THE TRUE STANDARD FOR ESTIMATING MINISTERS. 


THEIR WORTH TO BE 


MADE KNOWN IN DUE TIME. OUR JUDGMENT TO BE SUSPENDED TILL THEN. 


Cuarter IY. 1-5. 


Let a man so [So let a man] account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards 
2 of the mysteries of God. Moreover [Here dde"] it is required? in stewards, that a man be 


3 found faithful. 


4 you, or of [by] man’s judgment [lit. day]: yea, I judge not mine own self. 


But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of [by] 


For L 


know nothing by [against] myself; yet am I not hereby [not by this am I] justified: 
5 but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until 
the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will 
make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man [each one] have 


[from azo] praise of [his 6] God. 


1 Ver. 2.—dée is supported by a great preponderance of authorities [A. B. C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.] and preferred by Lach. 


Meyer [Alf. Stanley], to the Rec. ὃ de. 
2 


See under “ Exegetical and Critical.” 


Ver. 2.---ζητεῖται is sustained mainly by the old versions, and is decidedly preferable to ζητεῖτε [which is found in A. 


C. D. Cod. Sin. and others.] 
and αι. 
That a man,” etc. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 1. [Having thus exhibited the regal title 
of Christians to all things, to the benefits to be 
derived from all Christian ministers, and from 
all objects and events in this world, he now 
turns to present, as a corollary from this, the view 
which they ought to take of ministers, and the 
manner in which they are to treat them; andthus, 
as it were, to remind them of certain limitations 
in the prerogatives of those whom they were 
disposed unduly to honor].—So let a man ac- 
count of τ5.--- οὕτως, 8οθ. This does not serve 
to connect the following with what precedes, as 
Meyer (8d Ed., but not 2d Ed.) supposes, render- 
ing it: so then, or, accordingly. .No such connection 
is here implied.*) Rather Panl here intends to 
hold up the proper mode of estimating teachers 
in contrast with that “boasting” in them re- 
probated in iii. 21; and the ‘‘so” here refers 
to what follows. — ‘So as servants ‘of 
Christ.’—not as leaders taking His place.t 
Ἡμᾶς, us, primarily or chiefly, Paul and 
Apollos, as ver. 6 and iii. 4, show. <Aoyifé- 
σϑαι, to bring to account, to reckon, to esti- 





* [This is not so clear. 
to what precedes. And here certainly Paul seems to be ap- 
plying the principle, he had just been laying down in gene- 
ral, to himself and his associates in particular. The very 
position of οὕτως ἡ μᾷᾶ5 sous, too, seems to require this. 
As they were Christ’s, so it was to be borne in mind that he 
and Apollos were also Christ’s, and that, too, in their official 
capacity. They were Christ’s servants—stewards of God’s 
Mysteries, and were to be respected accordingly. Οὕτως, 
80, therefore points back to what has been said, and also for- 
wards to ὡς, as, which resumes and makes the implication 
more definite]. 

_t [But in thus putting the emphasis on their official capa- 
city, rather than on the fact of their belonging to Christ, the 
way does not seem to be prepared for what follows. There 
may, indeed, be an implication here of a subordinate position, 
which contradicted their partisan estimates; but this evi- 
dently retires before the rising thought just about to find 
expression]: 





Οὕτως does often have reference 





Stanley remarks that the confusion arises from the similarity of sound in Romaic between e 
The Cod. Sin. inserts τί before ζητεῖτε, and would be rendered, “Moreover what do you here seek in stewards? 


mate, as in Rom. viii. 86 (Step). ‘It implies 
Δ ae 


the formation of a sound, well-weighed estimate, 
as contrasted with the partisan judgments which 
the Corinthians formed respecting their teach- 
ers.” OSIANDER. “Avdpwroc, = not, every 
man, but, man generally, according to the Hel- 
lenic and Hebrew usage. Ὑπηρέτας ἃ διάκο-- 
vol, 111. 5. The word properly denotes a servant 
of subordinate rank, an understrapper. In pa- 
tristic parlance it was used of sub-deacons. The 
New Testament employs it for helpers and atten- 
dants. Luke iy. 20; Acts xiii. 5. The verb from 
which it comes, occurs in Acts xxyi. 16, to signify 
Dayid’s working for the fulfilment of God’s pur- 
poses. In the text the word carries the idea of 
one laboring for the cause of Christ. To adopt 
its fundamental meaning, that of a rower [as 
Valck.: ‘‘Christ is Pilot of the vessel of the 
Church, we are rowers under His command.’ 
Worps.], would be just as appropriate as to 
render it: adjutants or orderlies, according to the 
precedent in Xenophon. If not precisely equi- 
valent to ‘‘deacon,” yet it certainly is brought in 
here to indicate a very subordinate position under 
Christ, in contrast with the leadership ascribed 
by the Corinthian partisans. Nevertheless the 
idea of honor is not excluded, since this comes 
from being connected with Christ, whose work is 
performed. The dignity of the office is, however, 
more prominently exhibited in the second desig- 
nation—and stewards of the mysteries of 
God—vikovépove μυστηρίων ϑ.εοῦ. Rom. 
xyi. 23; 1 Pet.iy.10. The article is not prefixed, 
because the word stands qualitively, to indicate 
that what has been entrusted to their charge is 
something very important and weighty. And by 


steward, for_he was sent not to baptize, but te 


Cc 


---.. ~—_ 


- 


—— 


~ 


88 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





preach the Gospel]. Rather they are ‘the mys-|o and ὦ, than which, he says, nothing is more 


tery of God” in its manifold variety and fulness; 
or as Luke viii. 10: ‘‘the mysteries of the king- 
dom of God;” in other words, the revelations 
of God, as matters which could be known only 
by Divine communication. [Such is the mean- 
ing of the word “mystery” in the New Testa- 
ment—not, as incommon parlance: something un- 
comprehensible ; but: something which, being beyond 
the reach of man’s intelligence, has been made known 
to him in some special Divine way]. The ‘stew- 
ardship”’ consists in [preserving and adminis- 
tering the truth revealed through] preaching and 
teaching,—no less in properly didactic instruction 
thinin prophecy. The ‘ steward” belonged 
among the ‘‘servants,”’ and his business was, not 
to manage one particular branch of the household 
economy, but to take the whole in charge. He 
was therefore put over the rest of the servants. 
The stress here, however, is not to be laid upon 
the preéminence enjoyed by the steward, but upon 
the responsibility accompanying the goods en- 
trusted.” Neanpger. To suppose that the Apostle 
used the term ‘stewards,’ with some vague 
idea of provisions floating before his mind, to 
which he would liken the truth,—as if the 
persons thus denominated were regarded by 
him in the light of family providers, would be 
rather far fetched, and Luke xii. 42 gives no 
countenance for such a thought in our passage. 
‘‘Between the father of the household and the 
stewards, there stood the son, who had from the 
father a power of control, so that the stewards 
were in fact his servants likewise.” ΜΈΥΕΒ. 
Ver. 2. Here, moreover.—We must first 
consider what the true reading is here. The 
Ree. has 6 δὲ λοιπόν. But this is not by any means 
so well supported as ὧδε λοιπόν, which is the 
reading that prevails throughout the codices, 
versions, and church fathers in equal degree. 
If it be not the original reading, then it must 
have come in either by mistake, or by intentional 
correction, since the phrase ὃ δὲ λοιπόν nowhere 
else occurs. But neither case is probable, con- 
sidering the numerous, and at least partially 
independent authorities which attest it. The 
Ree. text, apart from its unusualness, is evidently 
the easier reading, [and therefore may be the 
more readily accounted for as an intended emen- 
dation]. It would be rendered, but finally ; lit. 
as for what remains: i.e. after setting aside all 
your unsuitable claims. But. ὦδε, which occurs 
nowhere else in Paul, save in Col. iv. 9, though 
very common in other parts of the New Testa- 
ment, means, here; 7%. e., in this connection, or in 
this matter, where we are treating of the adminis- 
tration of the mysteries of God, comp. Rev. xiii. 
10, 18; xiv. 12; xvii. 9. ee translates it lo- 
cally: here, on this earth, ‘It is,” he says, ‘*em- 
phatic, and points to what follows, that though in 
the case of stewards inquiry was necessarily made 
here below, yet he, God’s steward, awaited no such 
inquiry, ὑπὸ ἀνθρωπίνης ἡμέρας : by man’s judg- 
ment, but one at the coming of the Lord.” 
Stanley follows Lachmann in connecting ὦδε with 
the previous words, “Ἢ stewards of the mysteries 
of God here,’” and makes it mean, in this matter 
(as in the references above given). Wordsworth 
adheres tothe Ree. He considers ὧδε as harsh. and 
accounts for it as arising from the confusion of 





common in the best Mss. Hodge, on the con. 
trary, says it yields good sense]. Λοιπόν might 
serve for making the transition, like ceterum, 
moreover, and belong primarily to dde. Or it 
may be joined to ‘‘is required,” (which is favored 
by the order of the words), and so as to imply, 
that with this consideration the whole matter is 
wound up; or to express something further 
in relation to that mentioned in ver. 1, which 
was specially worthy of consideration,—it is 
required that.—iva has a telic sense, and 
shows that the purport of the requirement is at 
the same time its purpose. The investigations 
in regard to such persons, aims at this, that 
one be found faithful.—This is why great 
trusts : rs reposed in a person, that he might con- 
duct himself in the management of them accord- 
ing to the mind and will of God, who has committed 
them to Him, for the glory of His name and the 
welfare of His Church, and not for the legatee’s 
own benefit (comp. Luke xii. 42). Etpevdq, be 
found by the result as shown at the time of trial 
OsIANDER. Tic, according to Meyer, every one 
[‘‘ Faithful,” emphatic. ‘‘The great requisite for 
the office of a steward is fidelity. As a servant 
he must be faithful to his master. As a disciple, 
he must be faithful to those under his oversight. 
He must not neglect to dispense to them their 
food, nor adulterate it, nor substitute any thing 
in place of that given to be distributed. So in 
regard to ministers.” Hoper]. 

Ver. 3. Having stated the point of view from 
which alone a proper.judgment could be formed 
in regard to him and his associates, Paul next 
proceeds to state his own feelings as to the judg- 
ment that might be formed of him by men. [Al- 
ford adds, ‘‘in contrast to the case of the stew- 
ards, into whose faithfulness enquiry is made 
‘here’ on earth.”’] Very naturaily the Corinthi- 
ans would think that a good deal of weight at- 
tached to their judgment.—But [δέ indicates a 
transition to the application of what was said in 
general to his own particular cause] for me it 
amounts to the very least thing.—cic 
ελάχιστόν ἐστιν. The εἰς here, according to 
Greek usage, shows the result to which the thing 
comes—that I be judged by you. —iva 
ἂνακριϑῦ. The objective clause in telic form. 
It certainly is not equivalent to ὅταν ἀνακριϑῶ: 
when I am judged; nor perhaps precisely the 
same as τὸ ἀνακριϑῆναι, to be judged. [**Here 
and always ἵνα is more or less the conj. of pur- 
pose.” ALrorp*]. A weakness of its force in the 


later Greek is not to be denied; but here the idea 


of intention or tendency lies in this, that some- 
thing is about to happen or impends: ‘I am 
not at all disturbed that I shall be judged by you 
as to my merits.’ [Stanley, on the other hand, 
says that ‘‘the substitution of iva with the sub- 
junctive for the indicative is in the modern 
Romaic,” and seems to take it so here]—er by 
man’s judgment—lit. : ‘by human day.’ This 


{* But Jelf in Gr. Gram. ὃ 803, obs. 1, shows in full argu- 
ment the gradual modification of meaning until it comes 
to have the force only of the accusatival infinitive. And 
this, he says, is frequent in the New Testament. There 
seems to be a great effort among some critics to avoid the 
admission of this, and to show the telic force of iva in every 
instance], 





| 


τας 


lates it:—‘‘I know nothing by myself.” 


CHAP. IV. 1-6. 


— 


is neither to be taken as a Cilicism nor as a 
Hebraism. It designates a day of judgment, 
analogously with the phrase dicem dicere, and 
here comes in correspondingly with the expres- 
sion: “ἀν of the Lord.”” We are not to under- 
stand by it a private decision (‘“‘by you”) in 
contrast with a public one. But itis a genera- 
lization of the phrase: ‘by you,’ and by an ob- 
vious transition, the day of the act is put for the 
act itself, and the judgment as a whole for the 
judges themselves; or as Meyer: the day is per- 
sonified, and hence ὑπό is used in accordance 
with ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν, by you. There is something of 
solemnity in this phraseology; nor is it without 
a slight touch of irony or rebuke at their pre- 
sumption in being supposed to fix upon a day of 
trial, and to sit upon a judgment-seat in order 
to pronounce upon Paul’s merits or demerits. 
All appearance of haughtiness in this disparage- 
ment of other’s opinions is removed by what fol- 
lows.— Yea, I judge not of mine own self. 
Lit.: ‘But neither do [ju a τ γῇ The ἀλλά 
here is like that in iii. 2. Before ἐμαυτὸν we 
would naturally look for an ovréc. But this is 
notnecessary. The judgment on himself, which 
he here disavowg, is a final decision as to his 
own merits, such as he is willing to abide by. 
[‘‘Paulis here speaking not of the actions of 
men whether good or bad, but of the eminence 
of each individual, which ought not to be esti- 
mated by men’s humors.” Cavin]. 

Ver. 4. Instead of the expected antithesis, 
there follows first a confirmation of what pre- 
cedes, in the way of a parenthesis. -ForI know 
nothing with myself.—tThis first clause is 
concessive, [the force of for, as Winer says, 
falling upon the subsequent clause]: g. d. ‘For 
although 1 know,” ete. So also Meyer, [who 
says, however, that the force of the proof does 
not lie in the second clause, so that the first 
would be only concessive, but im the antithetic 
relation of both clauses. He yet gives the sense 
thus]: ‘The clearness of my conscience as to 
my official duties is nevertheless (doch) not the 
ground on which my justification rests.” [The 
phraseology here is peculiar, but thoroughly idio- 
matic, both in the Greek (οὐδὲν ἐμαυτῳ σύνοιδα) 
and in our E. V., which almost literally trans- 
So also 
the Latin—nil conscire sibi. All expressions 
alike mean: I am conscious of no wrong. (See 
Jelf, Gr. Gram., ἢ 682, 2). The English phrase 
is to be found in the early writers, and Stanley 
asserts: ‘it is still a provincial form of speech for 
the same thought’]. ‘Know nothing,’ i. 6., so 
far as my official conduct is concerned, [‘‘Else- 
where he speaks of himself as the ‘chief of sin- 
ners,’ which is perfectly consistent with his say- 
ing, that his conscience acquitted himself of 
failure as a Christian minister.”” Hopcr.]|—Yet 
not in this am I justified—. ¢., before God. 
It is a question, however, whether this justifica- 
tion is to be understood in the dogmatic sense, 
fer imputed righteousness], as Meyer, and 

illr., and others maintain, or in the legal, 
ethical sense [as the early fathers, Calvin, Hodge, 
Alford, and others assert]. If the former, then 
the meaning is: that since his justification did 
not depend on the verdict of his own conscience 
but upon Christ, therefore his conscience could 


89 





not furnish the ground on which he was to judge 
himself. If the latter, then the sense would be: 
that his acquittal of all blame does not rest on 
the fact that his conscience charged him with no 
official derelictions; since conscience pronounced 
only in regard to particular actions and not to 
the whole moral character as it appears in God’s 
sight, so that of course a clean conscience could 
afford no certain basis of estimating the real 
worth of any person. Of these interpretations 
the latter is to be preferred, since there is no 
allusion in the context to the Gospel doctrine of 
justification by faith. but he that judgeth 
me.—[Observe, not: ‘‘that justifieth me,” which 
language would have been the term employed, had 
Paul here had in mind the matter of his general 
Christian estate, but: ‘“‘judgeth” (avaxpivwr), 1. e., 
holds an inquest and decides on the merits of the 
case which may be brought into issue. |—is the 
Lord.—. 6., Christ, [who looked deeper than 
conscience; and of course deeper than all outside 
observers], and who alone could comprehend all 
the data by which his official conduct was to be 
estimated. [‘* This inward allegiance of the con- 
science is the highest form of worship. The 
Lord Jesus was to the Apostle the object of all 
those sentiments and feelings which terminate on 
God. And He must be so to us, or we are not 
Christians. What makes a man a Christian is to 
feel and act towards Christ as God.” Honekr. ]. 

Ver. 5. Practical inference from the foregoing. 
So then (core), judge nothing.—y7rTe Kpi- 
verte. Τί is not the object of judgment but its 
contents. It is equivalent to κρίσιν τινά. Hence 
the meaning is: ‘‘do not judge any judgment.” 
The logic may be presented thus: ‘Since my 
judgment belongs to the Lord, therefore refrain 
from all premature decisions respecting me.” 
BILLRoTH, with less simplicity, says: ‘“‘Since Ido 
not even judge myself, therefore follow my ex- 
ample, and do not yourselves judge.” Healludes 
here not to the mutually disparaging censures 
cast upon each other by the several factions 
(Billr.), but to the judgment of the Corinthian 
brotherhood upon himself.—before the time, 
—which is more fully explained in,—until the 
Lord shall come.—The fime of His advent to 
judgment—His ‘‘appearing,”’ or ‘‘epiphany”’ 
(2 Tim. iv. 1; 2 Thess. i. 7). The ἕως ἄν is 
used with the subjunctive A 37, because an end 
to be reached is fixed upon from the standpoint of 
the present, but the reaching of which (here in 
respect of time), is still undecided. Or, accord- 
ing to Meyer: ‘‘The coming is thereby desig- 


nated as problematical, and dependent on cir- | 


cumstances; not indeed, asit is doubted; alsonot, 
as it is dependent upon subjective determination, 
but, as it is an object of expectant faith.” [The, 
uncertainty indicated by ἄν is not as to the fact 
of Christ’s coming, but as to the time when He 
shall come: g. d., ‘‘until the Lord shall come, 
whenever that may be.’’ (See Jelf., Gr. Gram., 
ἢ 846, 2.)] (Comp. Matth. xvi. 28; Luke xiii. 
35).—That a correct judgment will then, for the 
first time, be possible is shown from what fol- 
lows.—who also.—The «ai here is neither to be 
taken in connection with the καί in following 
clause, as if it were et, et, both, and: nor has ita 
mere strengthening force, even; but it serves to 
single out from among the functions of the Lord, 


[᾿ 
Ϊ 
| o 
ἢ 
\ 


/ 


90 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





as He comes to judgment, that one with which 


he is here concerned: [*‘also,’ inter alia, as part 


of the proceedings of that Day.’’ ALrorp. ]— 
will bring to light.—@urifew, with the accusa- 
tive, to enlighten, illuminate, as the sun does the 
world, and hence fo disclose, bring to light (comp. 
2 Tim. i. 10),—the hidden things of dark- 
ness :—. ¢., such as belong to darkness, or which 
darkness vails. (In Rom.ii.16, we have simply: 
“the hidden things.”)  [‘‘This includes acts 
now unknown, and those principles of action 
which lie concealed in the heart where no [hu- 
man] eye can reach them. This is all that the 
context requires. In other connections, the 
secret things, or the works of darkness, means 
wicked works, works done in the dark to avoid 
detection. But the Apostle is here speaking of 
the reason why judgment should be deferred 
until the coming of Christ. The reason is that 
He alone can bring to light the secret acts and 
motives of men.” Hopar.|—and will make 
manifest the counsels of the hearts.— 
Epexegetical of the former, or a specification 
under the general head just mentioned. One 
function of the Judge will be to lay open the 
inner determinations of the will—the motives 
and purposes by which men are governed, and 
which are withdrawn from human sight. It is 
on these that the decision respecting our merits 
and our fidelity must at last turn. All depends 
upon the simplicity of our temper—upon such a 
service of the Lord as excludes all by-ends, and 
is upright and sincere. ‘The thought here is 
this: In this life our inward character can only 
be inferred from our acts; at the judgment it 
will be directly laid open by the Lord.” Nran- 
pER.—and_ then,—as contrasted with the pre- 
sent, when_so much is vailed, and when men 
are disposed _to exercise a premature judgment 
—shall each one have his praise :—éxdorw 
6 éxaivoc. Literally: ‘to each one the praise,” 
ἃ, e., the praise which is his due, according to its 
various measures and degrees, corresponding to 
his worth. He here speaks of praise only, since 
he has in view primarily Apollos and himself, 
and not any Judaizing opposers. Hence there 
is no necessity of taking ἔπαινος as vox media, 
contrary to all usage, or even to regard it as an 
euphemism (with Theophylact). Paul’s state- 
ment here, as CALyIN says, ‘‘arises from the 
assurance of a good conscience. He knew 
there was laid up for him ἃ crown of righteous- 
ness (2 Tim. iv. 8).—from God.—This stands 
emphatically at the close. By this he gives us 
to understand that the judgment of the Lord, 
which would be pronounced upon his servants, 
was the judgment of God himself. Thus does he 
appeal from those partizan judgments, which 
exalt one at the expense of another, to the abso- 
lute and impartial judgment of God, who will 
give to each one his due. On the adjudication 
of Christ in its relations to God see Rom. ii. 16; 
Acts x. 42; xvii. 31. On ‘‘the praise from God” 
see Matth. xxv. 21. “The command not to 
anticipate the judgment of the Lord is consistent 
with Paul’s frequent recognition of the right and 
duty of the Church to sit in judgment on the 
,, qualifications of her own members. He is here 
| speaking of the heart. The Church cannot judge 
| the heart. Whether a man is sincere or insincere 





Or roams s>$>$>@oosoooaoaooo ry, 


in his professions, whether his experience is 
genuine or spurious, God only can decide. The 
Church can only judge of what is outward. If 
any man profess to be holy, and yet is immoral 
the Church is bound to eject him, as Paul clearly 
teaches in the following chapter. Or if he pro- 
fess to be a Christian, and yet rejects Christi- 
anity, or any of its essential doctrines, he cannot 
be received, Tit. iii. 10. But ‘the counsels of 
the heart’ only the Searcher of hearts can judge.” 
Hopes. ] 


DOGMATICAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Christ's ministers stewards of the mysteries of 
God.—In this we see the high significance and 
solemn responsibility of the ministerial office. 
In a preéminent sense, Curist is the servant of 
God. Itis through His hand that the pleasure 
of the Lord prospers; and on Him has God poured 
His Spirit without measure, and to His control 
given all things, and on Him conferred power 
over all flesh that He should give eternal life to 
as many as God has given Him. Subordinate to 
Him in this work are Apostles, Evangelists, Pas- 
tors and Teachers, acting the part, so to speak, 
of handworkmen (ὑπηρέται). They labor under 
His direction, undertaking and executing all 
those various offices by which the redemption 
and the guidance of souls are accomplished. The 
more completely they put themselves under Him, 
preferring His will and His plans to their own, 
seeking no glory but His, asserting His authority 
as the only rule—the more exalted will they ap- 
pear in God’s sight, as persons who are worthy 
to cooperate with ‘“‘ His Servant” in this, the most 
important of all concerns, and to become the or- . 
gans of hi3 gracious purposes. 

The lofty significance of their office appears 
enhanced by the fact, that in this service they 
are made ‘‘ stewards of the mysteries of God.” To 
them has been committed the wondrous plan of 
salvation—a plan which from all eternity had been 
hid in God, and was concealed from the re- 
searches of the wisest in this world, and was at 
last revealed in Jesus Christ, and hence is well 
termed a mystery—even this plan, with all the 
means requisite for its execution, in reconciling 
sinners to God, and awaking the spiritually dead, 
and enlightening the benighted, and originating, 
preserving, confirming, and perfecting the life of 
faith in God’s dear children. Their business it 
is, therefore, to employ this wealth of Divine in- 
strumentalities for the extension of the kingdom 
of God on earth, and in behalf of each and all of 
God’s people; and to discharge this trust pub-— 
licly and privately, towards all classes and con- 
ditions in society without partiality :—to inquire 
out the ways through which God leads sculs to 
the truth, and to construct such ways, by examin- 
ing into the tendencies and characteristics and 
wants of individuals and communities, and by 
investigating their circumstances and inward 
conditions in life; and then to urge men to enter 
them:—to be unwearied in beseeching men in 
Christ’s stead to become reconciled to God, warn- 
ing, exhorting, rebuking, reproving, in the con- 
sciousness that God is acting in them and through 
them and in the exercise of something of His 
holy earnestness and pitying love. This, this is 


CHAP. IV. 1-5, 


91 


-—_————— rr. oa ὅ6ςΠΓ [ ὃῦὅΚ66ὉὁἨὈὃ ὃ ὃ ὃ ὃὁὅ Τ ἝἽἝΎΧ 


to act the part of a faithful steward; this is to 
fulfil the obligation which rests upon the office- 
bearers of a Christian church. In order to be 
thus faithful they must be instructed by the 
Spirit, and follow in the footsteps of Him who, 
as the Son of God, was faithful in all His house, 
and who said of Himself that He could do nothing 
except what He saw the Father do. But if, in- 
stead of this, they go their own ways, employ 
methods to their own liking, conduct themselves 
_ so that the mind and counsel of God are not to 
be discerned in them—if they allow themselves 
to be carried away by carnal zeal and impatience, 
or yield to disgust and slothfulness, or suffer 
sensual gratifications, whether refined or gross, 
or a love of honors and authority and applause 
to slip in and betray them into unhallowed 
courses,—then are they chargeable with a faith- 
lessness which incurs a fearful accountability. 

2. The Lord tis Judge.—This truth is, on the 
one hand, a source of comfort to all true servants 
of God, amid the various criticisms and censures 
passed upon them; and, on the other hand, it 
‘serves to abate the confidence of their own self- 
estimation. In the great day of account the 
Searcher of hearts will bring to light all that has 
been stirring within them, their longings and 
strivings, their secret motives and inward strug- 
gles, their inarticulate sighs as wellas their ut- 
tered prayers; and in view of these things, all 
unknown to men, will He judge them. However 
others, who judge according to appearance, may 
find occasions for censure, or may misconstrue 
their doings and omissions, they can accept it 
all in peace and look away in calm assurance 
from these hasty decisions to the righteous sen- 
tence of an All-seeing Judge.—Yet, with all this, 
there is at the same time something very subdu- 
ing in the anticipation of this only valid adjudi- 
cation. However unconscious of blame they may 
be in the discharge of their duties, still this can 
afford them no certain ground for hoping to be 
acquitted before theirLord. His all-piercing eye 
detects faults that are hidden from their own 
consciences; and in His all-illuminating light 
much may appear unclean which to their clouded 
vision seems stainless. Hence it becometh them 
to be modest and leave to Him the final award.— 
Yet from him, who has.been diligent in his en- 
deavors to be faithful, the due praise will not be 
withheld,—however much men might criticize. 
From the mouth of his Lord he will receive the 
sentence: ‘‘Well done thou good and faithful 
servant, thou hast been faithful over a few things, 
I will make thee ruler over many things. Enter 
thou into the joy of thy Lord.”—But even as 
when on earth every tribute of honor had the 
effect only to humble him the more, by bringing 
out in contrast a sense ot his own unworthiness; 
80, too, will he receive this approval of his graci- 
ous Chief Shepherd in utmost lowliness. The 
crown of glory will ever be cast at his feet. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Starke :—Christ’s servants should perform 
their service, not so as to please men, but as the 
Lord requires. As stewards of the Gospel trea- 
sures, they have the right to open these treasures, 
and to close them against the wicked (Matth. 


xvi. 19). The higher the Lord, the higher the 
servant; yet the latter is ever subordinate.— 
Ministers are servants, not lords, of men’s faith. 
One is our Master, even Christ. Both pastors 
and flock are brethren (2 Cor. i. 24), (Hed.), 
ver. 1.—A minister must be faithful: 1, to God, 
in looking to Him with single eye, seeking His 
honor, acting according to His will and main- 
taining His rights; 2, to the Church, in with- 
holding from it nothing essential to its welfare, 
and in declaring the whole counsel of God, so 
that no person shall suffer or perish through his 
fault or neglect; 8, to his own office in not act- 
ing the part of a lord, but of a servant who is: 
ready to listen and labor. Fidelity in office grows: 
out of fidelity to one’s self. A true preacher: 
preaches Christ not only with the mouth but 
from the heart. He speaks from experience and‘ 
confirms his doctrine by his conduct, ver. 2.—.- 
A minister of God must be deaf, alike to the: 
praise and the blame of men. His rule is the: 
will of his Master, not the opinion of men. [Γ᾿ 
he follows the latter he will never be faithful in: 
his office, ver. 8.—It is one thing to have a. 
good conscience before God for our consolation. 
(1 Jno. iii. 21) and another thing to have it for- 
our self-justification. The one requires a sin- 
cerity and diligence such as David could claim, . 
the other a faultless perfection such as neither - 
David nor Paul dare arrogate (Ps. xix.18; Phil. . 
111, 12).—Blessed state, to be conscious of no; 
wrong, and yet not to be disposed to justify one- 
self, ver. 4.—How unlike the judgment of God. 
and the judgment of man. The former comes at. 
the end of probation, is impartial, comprehensive: 
in its data; the latter is ordinarily premature, 
rash, and grounded only on the outward appear- 
ance.—What must be the disclosures of the last 
day! God holds the key to the inmost thoughts 
of all men; and when they are all open to in- 
spection, how fearful will then be the outcry! 
Take heed, O hypocrite; the Lord knows thee. 
Rejoice, thou sincere heart; the Lord will come 
and be thy witness (Job xxxiv. 21), ver. 5. 
RieGER :—The office of the preacher springs out 
of Christ.—As the Father sent Him, so He sends 
forth His ministers in order to proclaim the 
power which has been committed to Him in 
heaven and earth. This is their service and 
stewardship, ver. 1.—If distinctions are to be 
made among ministers, better look to their fidelity 
than to their gifts or reputation; and in judging 
of fidelity, that must often be taken into account 
which is least apt to strike the notice of men. 
Heusner, A.:—TZhe worth of true evangelical 
ministers consists: 1, in the purpose of their office; 
a, to serve Christ and be wholly dependent on, 
His word; and hence, 6, to promote the salvation 
of the congregation as stewards of God, ver. 1.— 
2, In their fidelity, which is seen; a, in the 
actual discharge of their duties; ὁ, in a sincerity 
of spirit which ever stands as in God’s sight and 
cares to be approved by Him alone, ver 2.—8, In 
the humility, which; a, refuses to justify self, 
ver. 8 ff., and, ὁ, awaits in confidence the Divine 
award, vv. 4, 5.—B. Ministers and congreyations 
will one day together stand at the bar of God:—1. 
They will so stand, for; a, Paul implies this; ὁ, it 
is necessary to the revelation of the Divine righte- 
ousness, 2. The fact is a momentous one; a, for 


92 





ministers—it ought to shame them of their un- 
faithfulness, prompt them to walk conscientiously, 
and lift them above the opinions of the world; ὁ, 
for the congregation—it should keep them from 
judging before the time, and cause them to take 
heed rather that the Word of God brings forth 
fruit among them; c, for both—they ought to 
conduct themselves as if already before the 
judgment seat.—Man is often unconscious of the 
deepest motives which actuate him; hence he can 
give himself no assurance that he has omitted 
nothing due, or done nothing sinful, ver. 4. 
—So act always that thou canst at any moment 
have thy heart exposed, ver. 5. 


Gossner:—As a general thing, the natural 
man loves to hear what people think of him. It 
is harder to despise praise than blame. 


[Hopar:—‘Ver. 1 contains two important 
truths: ministers have no arbitrary or discre- 
tionary authority in the Church; neither have 
they any supernatural power such as is attri- 
buted to them in the Romish Church. Their 
authority is merely ministerial, and therefore to 
be judged by the standard of those commands 
which are known to the whole Church. And, 
secondly, they are not, like Aristotle or Plato, 
the originators of their own doctrines, or the 
teachers of the doctrines of other men, but sim- 
ply the dispensers of the truths which God has 
revealed.” } 


W. F. Bessrr:—Ver. 2. It is a comfort that 
nothing but fidelity is required of stewards, not 
talents, nor inventive powers, nor manifold ac- 
tivity, nor success. The daintiness and fanciful 
taste of the vain and luxurious Corinthians, in 
whose sight fidelity seemed a small virtue, are 
no rarity in these times. But worse still is the 
rebellion shown by many congregations, who style 
themselves churches of Christ, against the fidelity 
of their pastors and teachers. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ee? 


[G. C. A. Hartess:—Venr. 2. What is here as- 
serted of ministers holds good also of all Chris- 
tians. Compare the parable of our Lord on “The 
talents,” Matth. xxv. 14ff. The peculiar nature 
of the fidelity demanded is determined by the 
peculiar character of the blessing of salvation 
intrusted. It is not fidelity to a duty outwardly 
imposed, to a precept, rule, maxim or the like, but 
fidelity to an inwardly active vital principle— 
personal fideMty to a personal fellowship with 
God, wrought by the power of the Holy Ghost. 
It is the fidelity of a new-born child of God in 
whom the Spirit testifies to what the word 
promises]. 

[Catvin:—Venr. 4. Conscious of no wrong, and 
yet not justified. ‘*Papists abuse this passage 
for the purpose of shaking the assurance of faith; 
and truly I confess that if their doctrine were 
admitted, we could do nothing but tremble in 
wretchedness during our whole life. For what 
tranquillity could our minds enjoy if it were to 
be determined from our works whether we are 
well-pleasing to God. I confess, therefore, that 
from the main foundation of Papists there fol- 
lows nothing but continual disquietude for con- 
sciences; and accordingly we teach that we must 
have recourse to the free promise of mercy which 
is offered to us in Christ, that we may be fully 
assured that we are accounted righteous by 
God”’]. 

Ἂν; = ea :—Vers. 1-5. The characteristics of 
a faithful steward.—I. All he has he regards as 
belonging to his Lord. II. He is as faithful in 
small things asin great things. III. The source 
of his fidelity is his love for his Lord.—Tu. Cuat- 
MERS :—Vy. 38-4. The judgment of men compared 
with the gudgment of God.—I. God has a right 
to prefer greater claims against us, than men 
can. II. God has a clearer and more elevated 
sense of moral worth and holiness than men 
have]. 


VIII.—APPLICATION OF THE FOREGOING CONTRAST BETWEEN THE SELF-SUFFI- 
CIENCY OF THE CORINTHIANS AND THE ACTUAL CONDITION AND DEPORTMENT 


OF THE APOSTLES. 


CraptTer IV. 6-138. 


6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos 
for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men [om. to think of need 


7 up for one against another. 

8 

9 ye did reign, that we also might reign with you. 
10 unto the world, and to angels, and to men. 


above that which [the things which?] is [are] written, that no one of you be puffe 

For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what 
hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou 
glory, as if thou hadst not received it? Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have 
reigned as kings without us: and I would to God [om. to God, and insert indeed, ete.] 
For I think that God hath set 
forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle 
We are fools for Christ’s sake, but ye 
are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honorable, but we are 


CHAP. IV. 6-18. 





93 





11 despised. Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked 
12 and are buffeted, and have no certain dwellingplace; and labor, working with our 


13 own hands: being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it: 


Being defamed, 


we entreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things 


unto this day. 


1 Ver 6.—The φβονεῖν of the received text is an old supplement, which is not to be found in good authorities [A. B. D.* 
ἘΠ F. G. Cod. Sin., nor in the Vulgate, and is omitted by Lach., Tisch, Mey., Alf., Words. and Stanley]. 


2 Ver. 6.—The Rec. has 6 [according to D. F. 1,1. 
adopted by Lach., Tisch. [Words. AIf.]. 
3 


The better authorities [A. B. C. Cod. Sin.] have a, which reading is 
Mey. thins that ἅ is a correction to suit the ταῦτα preceding. 


Ver. 11—[The Rec. has γυμνητεύομεν, with B2 but Α3. C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin. all have γυμνιτεύομεν. And this is the read- 


ing of all good editions now. See note}. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 6. [Having laid down certain principles 
in regard to the Church and its relations to its 
teachers, and illustrated them in the case of 
Apollos and himself, Paul now proceeds to show 
their more general scope and bearing].—And. 
—d é, [in the sense of now], indicates that he is 
approaching the close of what he has to say on 
party strifes.—these things.—ravra, refers 
back to iii. 5.—It is from that point that he has 
spoken of himself and Apollos. [So Hodge, de 
Wette, Meyer and others. But Alford says: 
‘«There is surely no reason for limiting its refer- 
ence within that point.”” Heaccordingly extends 
the reference back to ch. i. 12, and infers that 
all the names mentioned there were only used 
‘‘as samples,’’ behind which the real persons 
intended were hid].—brethren,—addressed to 
the Church as a whole, but primarily (de Wette) 
to the party leaders and their followers. ‘By 
this title he lays hearty hold upon the Corinthi- 
ans, who had been showing themselves very un- 
brotherly.” Bresser.—I have transferred in 
a figure,—yetecyyudtioa. There is some 
difficulty in determining the sense of this word. 
It elsewhere appears with the meaning: {0 trans- 
form, to change, Phil. iii. 21. The simple σχημα- 
τίζειν is used to denote that form of speech, 
where a person, instead of saying directly what 
he means, hints it in ways for his hearers to 
reflect upon and puzzle out the meaning of— 
allegorizes. It is used also of transformations, 
false movements, feint attacks, disguises (comp. 
2 Cor. xi.13). Neander explains it: ‘to trans- 
fer something to any one by a figure of speech. 
The μετεσχηματισμός here consists in this, that. 
Paul develops in reference to himself and Apollos 
what holds good also of all the Corinthian teach- 
ers.” Hence arose the old interpretation, that 
Paul had only by supposition represented in him- 
self and Apollos what really belonged to others 
who were the actual party leaders, putting his own 
name and that of his friend for theirs. But this 
is a groundless assumption, irreconcilable with 
i. 12.—Still less admissible is the idea that the 
word refers to the figures of ‘planting’? and 
“watering,” under which he had exhibited the 
nature of his work (iii. 6); for these were used 
only for vividly illustrating his point, and had 
nothing to do with the main object in hand.— 
Undoubtedly he means ‘‘a transfer” of such a 
sort,—that, what was true of teachers in general, 
and so was calculated to bring down the pride of 
the. party leaders at Corinth, he had applied 
especially to Apollos and himself. It was in fact 








a transforming of the general into the specific, 
the relation of which to the parties concerned is 
expressed by cic.—unto myself and Apollos, 
for your sakes,—Why he did this is at once 
explained,—_in order that in us ye may 
learn.—By exhibiting himself and Apollos of so 
small account (suitably no doubt to the feelings 
of the latter also), he would by example teach 
them that modesty which does not seek to exalt 
itself.—not above what is written.—r6 μὴ 
ὑπὲρ a&@ γέγραπται. Were φρονεῖν genuine 
[see under the text], then it would read: ‘not 
to think of yourselves above,” ete. But, as it is, 
the brief clause, converted into a substantive by 
the article τό, is very forcible, and is to be ren- 
dered imperatively: ‘‘not beyond what is writ- 
ten;”’ 7. e., exceed not this measure, hold to the 
Scripture rule both in your inward judgments 
and in your pretensions. Thus this short ex~ 
pression, so abruptly brought in, conveys more 
than the gloss, ‘‘to think.” [‘*The ellipsis of 
the verb is significant as giving greater largeness 
and general comprehensiveness to the proverb, 
which would be limited by the insertion of a 
particular verb with a special idea. Compare a 
similar ellipse in Terence, wt neqguid nimis, and in 
Milton: ‘Observe the rule of, not too much, by 
Temperance taught.’” Worps.].— But what 
does he mean by ὦ γέγραπται: ‘what things 
are or have been written?” Does he allude here 
to his own previous declarations? [as Luther and 
Caloy. assert, and Calvin allows]. Hardly; for 
then it would have been προέγραψα, J have before 
written (comp. Eph. iii. 3). According to Paul’s 
usage, the formula: ‘‘it is written,” refers to the 
Holy Scriptures, especially to the Old Testament: 
since we find no allusion to any New Testament, 
or to any life of Christ in any of Paul’s writings, 
[‘«though indeed, as Chrysostom supposes, St. 
Matthew’s Gospel had been written at this time, 
and there the Corinthians would find cautions 
from Christ himself against the sin of calling and 
being called, Rabbi.” Worps.]. Undoubtedly 
Paul here has in mind, not individual expressions 
of Holy Writ, but its collective tenor, which all 
points to this truth: that all honor belongs to 
God; and that all self-boasting, all cleaving to 
men, and priding oneself in men, must be given 
up. This doctrine we find summed up in apoph- 
thegms like Jer. ix. 23, to which reference has 
already been made. The sense, therefore, cannot 
be doubtful. This is exhibited more clearly in 
what follows:—that ye be not puffed up one 
for one against another.—The Ind. φυσιοῦσϑε 
after iva occasions no little difficulty. The Ind. 
after iva first appears in the later Greek, nowhere 
else in the New Testament. [Winer, however, 


94 


THE FIRST EPISTLE ΤῸ THE CORINTHIANS. 


———————— LLL AL LEE 


adopts the view that it is the Ind. and is to be 
regarded as an impropriety of the later Greek. 
ἃ xli. 1. b.; and so does Jelf, Gr. Gram., 3 806, 
ver. 2.] Some (Bengel, Osiander) assume here a 
peculiar or mistaken form of contraction for 
φυσιῶσϑε (as in ζηλοῦτε, Gal. iv. 17); others 
(Fritzche [Origen and Theod.] change ἵνα into 
éva; others give to iva a local signification: where, 
whereby, under which circumstances, and render 
the clause: “in which case, ἢ. 6.) while acting 
according to Scripture rule, ye are not puffed up,” 
(present for the future). So Meyer. Since the 
correction, which was designed to restore the 
supposed original text, is untenable,—for the 
reason that the change of éva into iva would have 
drawn the subjective after it (but which nowhere 
appears, save in one MS. of Chrysostom); and 
since the use of iva, in the sense proposed by 
Meyer, does not reach back to the prose of this 
period, we must in consequence decide for Ben- 
gel’s view, and all the more, for the reason, that iva 
stands just before in its telic sense. The second 
clause with iva stands either codrdinate with the 
first, or subordinate to it. The latter can be 
understood as denoting, equally with the former, 
the purpose of the Apostle, yet so as to be included 
in it—defining the point more exactly. [Toavoid 
the appearance of solecism, Wordsworth suggests 
that φυσιοῦσϑε be taken as imperative, thus in- 
volving a change from the indirect to the direct 
style. Examples of this sudden transition he 
finds in Acts i. 4; xxii. 8; xxiii. 32; Luke v. 14; 
Mark vi. 9; also in this very Epistle, i. 31.— 
Accordingly he would translate: ‘‘in order that— 
(you may practice this precept )—be not ye puffed 
up.” This is ingenious, but harsh, especially 
as we have iva with the subj. in the clause im- 
mediately preceding, and we would naturally 
look for the same construction here. Instead of 
‘liveliness,’ we should have ‘‘raggedness,’” of 
style as the result.] The meaning, however, is 
plain. We have here a striking exhibition of the 
partisan spirit. ‘‘It is the definition of a sect, 
where individuals admire individuals.” Buneen. 
The adherents of one party are here represented 
as seeking mutually to exalt each other to the 
prejudice of those of another party (comp. ὑπὲρ 
ἀλλήλων, 1 Thess.v.11), ὑπέρ: "ἰο the advantage of, 
in favor of (not [as Winer] ““ above the one,” both on 
account of the Gen. and of the contrast in κατά, 
against). Tow ἑνός, the one, denotes a person be- 
longing to the same party; τοῦ ἑτέρου, the other, a 
person belonging to another party. Interpreting, 
however, in the light of facts, wa must suppose 
that the leaders and not private‘ members are 
particularly intended. Ὑπέρ then would stand as 
in 2 Cor. viil.4. It implies that party pride which 
would prompt a person to puff his own chief and 
look down with contempt upon the chief of 
another party. De Wette, without sufficient 
grounds, insists on referring this to the Christ- 
party, who also had exalted their leaders above 
the others, 

Ver. 7. For.—Paul goes on to give the reason 
for his protest against their emulation, in the 
most energetic style, addressing a series of 
questions to those who were “puffed up.” The 
first— Who maketh thee to differ ?—‘‘This 
has been commonly taken to imply distinction of 
some sort; either aciwal distinction, by office and 





the like, in which case the answer would be: 
‘not thyself, but the Lord;’ or assumed distinc. 
tion by a claim to preéminence, in which case he 
would imply: ‘no one does this, but thyself ; 
it is an arbitrary self-promotion ;’ or at least: 
‘there is no judge qualified for doing this.’ But 
thus interpreted, the Apostle would be regarded 
as addressing properly the party leaders [so 
Words.], while it is clear that he was just before 
addressing the partisan followers. Besides, in 
the construction, first suggested above, the sec- 
ond question would be already anticipated. Fi- 
nally, these interpretations would transcend the - 
demonstrable use of dvaxpivecy, whether in the 
New Testament or elsewhere. The rendering 
best suited to usage and to the connection is: 
‘Who separates you?’ This, then, would refer 
to the party position which the person spoken to 
assumed, and in which he proudly stood aloof 
from other parties and their leaders. What the 
Apostle means to ask is: ‘What is the reason 
you say ’—or ‘Who justifies you in saying: “1 
am of Paul, and I of Apollos,” and in priding 
yourself in such partisanship? This party sepa- 
ration, in which you boast, is altogether arbitrary 
and unwarrantable.’ [Bengel, Words., Alf., Caly. 
give the meaning: ‘ Who distinguisheth thee,’ as 
if by reason of some excellence which is sup- 
posed to exist. And for this use of διακρίνω 
Words. refers to Acts xv. 9. The propriety of 
this, also, Hodge concedes. And it was the con- 
struction on which Augustine proceeded in his 
argument with Pelagius, and in his maintenance 
of the doctrine of sovereign grace. It seems 
better, therefore, to abide by the ordinary in-- 
terpretation given in the text].—In the second 
question,— What hast thou which thou 
didst not receive ?—he alludes to the advan- 
tages which a person might possess, and which 
stood connected in some way with the quicken- 
ing and informing influence of this or that 
teacher. [But is not this limiting the scope of 
the question too much? which plainly bears 
upon the leaders also]. ‘These advantages,’ he 
implies, ‘could only be the ground of pride in 
case they had been self-attained. But thou hast 
only what thou didst receive. ΑἹ] thine insight, 
thy gifts for speaking, efc., are a bestowment 
from God, even though imparted through human 
instrumentalities.’—To this question the next 
directly joins, since it presupposes that some- 
thing has been received; and this not proble- 
matically, but as actually existing,—and yet it 
designates the boasting as something contradic- 
tory to this supposition, and therefore wholly 
unsuitable. Its import is,—if—as I grant— 
thou really didst receive—something—why 
dost thou boast, as if thou hadst not re- 
ceived it ?—but all were due to thine own ex- 
ertions or to thy connection with this or that 
teacher?? The «aé here belongs, as usual 
(Passow II. p. 1540), not to the entire hypotheti- 
cal clause, but to ἔλαβες, and may be trans- 
lated, actually, indeed, really.—But. may we not 
obtain a fuller meaning, and one more comport- 
ing with the words and aim of the Apostle, if we 
suppose the Apostle to imply in the second ques- 
tion that nothing had been received, by punctu- 
ating it, either so that τί δὲ ἔχεις shall 
be taken alone: ‘and what hast thou ?’—or so 


CHAP. IV. 6-18. 


ee cacy 
that τί δὲ shall stand separately: ‘how now?’ 
or: ‘what then? hast thou that which thou 
didst not receive?’ He would thus be pointing 
to their vain conceit, their empty boasting, their 
pzide in the gifts of their teachers, in which they 
had no part themselves. The third question 
would then first treat of a case wherein they 
were supposed to have received something, and 
which as such excluded boasting. So Bengel: 
‘“‘There are many things, which thou has not 
received, and therefore thou hast not these 
things, and canst not boast of them; either thou 
hast received, or hast not received; if thou hast 
not received, thou possessest not; if thou hast 
received, thou possessest it not, except as re- 
ceived, and so without cause for glorying. The 
latter sense renders the meaning of kai, even, 
which immediately follows, more expressive, and 
shows the antanaclasis (repetition in a modified 
form) in the clauses: ‘thou hast not received’ 
and ‘hadst not received.’ ”’ 

Ver. 8. Already ye are full, already ye 
are rich; ye have reigned as kings with- 
out us.—[Having before rebuked, he here pro- 
ceeds to deride, as Calvin says,] their false con- 
tentment, vain self-sufficiency and lofty bearing, 
as if they had already reached the goal of all 
Christian hope and effort. Especially has he in 
mind certain persons who always aspired to 
pitch the tune, and the parasites, who were ever 
ready to strike in. The clauses here are not 
questions, but declarations charged with keenest 
irony. Only when so understood do the words 
earry their proper emphasis. To deny him the 
right to use such irony, and to impute lordly 
desires to Paul in consequence, is one of Riick- 
ert’s false assumptions. And to this Meyer fairly 
replies, that the Apostle must have been the best 
judge as to the mode in which it was necessary 
to discipline the Corinthians, and that it was 
precisely because of his very purity of conscience 
that he was able to yield to his justly roused 
feelings without rendering himself liable to sus- 
picion. Neander says: ‘‘ The conceit of a nar- 
row-minded bigotry can best be attacked with 
irony and sarcasm;”’ and Besser: ‘The servant 
of Christ need not be ashamed of any outburst of 
indignation that springs from a hearty love, and 
the biting salt of derision, which spices his lan- 
guage, does not detract from his amiability;” [and 
Hodge: ‘The prophets especially employ these 
weapons freely in their endeavors to convince 
the people of the folly of idols” ]. In what pre- 
cedes, Paul has just exhorted them to modesty 
in accordance with the pattern set by himself 
and Apollos, and reminded them of their depend- 
ence on God for all their endowments—a de- 
pendence which excluded boasting. Now he 
reminds them, not only that they were unmind- 
ful of this dependence, but that they were also 
cradling themselves in the vain conceit of their 
own perfection—they, the very persons whom he 
had just before convicted of great imperfection 
and moral perversity.—’ Hoy, already, i. e., solong 
before the proper time for it. It points to a goal 
remote, and hints that all true satisfaction, and 
true riches, and true kingship, belonged not to 
the present period of the world; and hence it im- 
plies that they were vainly anticipating the 














95 





glory which was to come hereafter. The word 
is put first for the sake of the emphasis. 

The three verbs following form a climax: ‘ye 
have enough;” ‘‘ye enjoy a superfluity ;” “you 
have attained to lordship.” κεκορεσμένοι 
ἐστές--ο:πλουτήσατε (comp. Rev. iii. 17); the 
former implies the full possession and enjoyment 
of salvation; the latter, that they had this in 
superabundance. We have here a picture of that 
self-conceit, that sense of suticiency and fulness 
which the sectarian spirit generally engenders, 
and by which all disposition to receive spiritual 
good from any quarter outside of the party cir- 
cle, is entirely destroyed. The sectarian always 
feels himself perfectly supplied in all respects, 
and in no time or way needful of any thing 
further.—It must be acknowledged, indeed, that 
the Corinthians were enriched by God’s grace, 
‘‘in all knowledge and in all spiritual gifts” (i. 
5-7), yét the consciousness of this fact was dis- 
figured by their pride; and that sense of their 
poverty in themselves, and of their manifold de- 
fects, which ought to have kept them humble, 
was in like manner suppressed.—In the verbs 
ἑπλουτήσατε and εβασιλεύσατε, the Aorist 
form leads us out of the idea of simple being into 
that of becoming (having become) comp. 2 Cor. viil. 
9. By the word ‘‘reign”’ we are not to understand 
either the enjoyment of any high degree of know- 
ledge, authority, safety and happiness [as Calvin 
and Barnes]; nor yet the supremacy attained by 
party leaders [as Billroth]; nor yet the pre- 
éminence of one party over another. Paul here 
refers to that regal state which Christians were 
to enjoy under the future reign of the Messiah, 
and which is alluded to in 2 Tim. ii. 12; Rom. 
viii. 17; Jno. xvii. 24; Rev. v.10; xx. 4;—a 
state in which they should be delivered from all 
the restraints of this life, and introduced into the 
full possession of all the gifts and powers of the 
heavenly kingdom. This it is which he says the 
Corinthians had begun to assume already, so pre- 
maturely. [So Alf., Stanley, Words., Hodge]. 
“That which afterwards developed itself in the 
Papacy on the one side, and in the fanatical 
sects, like that of the Anabaptists, on the other, 
had already begun to prevail in the Corinthian 
Church. When both the bottomless depths of 
sin and the glory of divine grace are alike un- 
comprehended, then people dream themselves 
into a supremacy, whose kingdom, with all ics 
show of spirituality, is of this world, and where 
the holy Apostles enter not.” BEssErR. ; 

There remains to be considered the cutting 
expression—without us—i. 6. without our pre- 
sence or codperation. He does not here mean 
to charge them with haying given him any per- 
sonal affront; but he only states with emphasis 
the fact as it was, viz., that in all their boasting, 
and in all their supposed attainment of their 
goal, himself and associates, [‘‘who had been 
looking forward to present them on that day as 
their glory and joy” Aur.], had no part, and 
were not needed. 

From this point he turrs to speak in another 
tone [‘‘and with solemnity” Aur.].—I would 
—igedov, according to later usage, a particle 
with the Indicative. [The addition ‘“‘to God” 
found in our version, is not authorized, or at 


90 





least not demanded by the original. The Scrip- 
tures do not authorize such appeals to God as 
seem to be in common, when our version was 
made” Hopar].—indeed;—y« strengthens the 
wish—that ye did reign.—The irony can 
hardly be supposed to continue here, as if he 
insinuated as the object of his wish: ‘that you 
might give us some share in your kingdom, 
[and that we might be of some account among 
you.” So Lightfoot, who interprets this as a 
‘bitter taunt” ]. This would have been indeed 
too bitter. Rather we must take it as the ex- 
pression of a glorious and sincere wish, that they 
had already reached the goal; so that the Apos- 
tles, their teachers, might enjoy their glory with 
them, inasmuch as both parties were inseparable 
in their final fruition of glory when this was 
actually obtained. ‘When you shall be per- 
fected, then we shall have ease, and the end of 
Apostolic trouble.” Beneet. This is implied in 
the clause—that we might reign with you. 
—lIn thus speaking of them as the original pos- 
sessors of glory, and of the Apostles as only 
partners with them, he adopts a humble phrase- 
ology, which at the same time conveys an in- 
direct rebuke at their pride (comp. Osiander in 
loco). 

vee. 9. For.—He here proceeds to state what 
reason he had for the wish just expressed, and 
how closely it lay on his heart, This reason 
might be seen in the miserable condition which 
he and his fellow Apostles were in. The connec- 
tion may be stated thus: ‘for we, the Apostles, 
(‘founders of churches, which these high-swell- 
ing pseudo-apostles are not,” Ο81.}, are so per- 
secuted and afflicted, that this fellowship in the 
kingdom cannot but be greatly desired by us.’ 
This is a more simple interpretation than to in- 
sert a parenthesis here, implying: ‘but this 
cannot happen until the kingdom of God is re- 
vealed; for I think,’ efec. Ruckert is mistaken in 
supposing that the irony is still continued, as if 
it meant: ‘very probably God has appointed us 
last; you naturally go in first, then, after all the 
rest, we follow suit.’ This interpretation (which 
supposes that what immediately precedes is iron- 
ical likewise) presents the Apostle in a too igno- 
ble aspect for even the utmost candor to admit. 
There is no implication of this sort in the open- 
ing word:—I think—dox«6—God has exhi- 
bited.—a πέδειξεν, asin 2 Thess. ii. 4, comp. 
Yeatpov—us.—To interpret this of Paul alone 
[as Calvin, Beza] is forbidden by the article be- 
fore drocréAove—_the Apostles.—And in case 
any would wish to translate: ‘God has appointed 
us, the Jast Apostles, unto death [as Calvin, 
Chrys.], an objection arises to this, apart from 
all other reasons, in the fact, that then the arti- 
cle would have been put before ἐσχάτους :—last. 
—In this word [which is here a predicate, at- 
tached to the verb defining its operation] there 
is expressed in a general manner what is after- 
wards stated more definitely—lasf, not in point 
of time, but in grade of society (homines infirne 
ν᾿ Nad appointed unto death. — dc 
ἐπιϑανατίους, Chrys.: καταδίκους; Suid.: 
προσδοκίμους τοῦ ἀποϑανεῖν, comp. 2 Cor. xi. 28-- 
27. No allusion is here made to bestiarii, or to 
gladiators [as Stanley after Tertullian, Chrys., 
Calvin and others]. That they, as malefactors 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





condemned to death, were also exposed to publie 
contempt, is still further set forth in a causal] 
sentence—for we are become a spectacle. 
—v¥éatpov, which is elsewhere called ϑέαμα. 
So ϑεατρίζεσϑαι, Heb. x. 833—to the world.— 
[‘‘not to a single city, but to the whole world ” 
Curys.],— corresponding to the range of the 
Apostles’ labors, which embraced all nations and 
lands (see Col. i. 6, 23; Rom. x. 18).—But this 
general term is so specialized as to include also 
the dwellers in heaven, the angels; and so he 
seems here to pass, in thought, beyond the direct 
sphere of his personal activity—As well to 
angels as to men.—By “angels” does he 
mean good or evil angels? Undoubtedly the 
former, since no epithet is applied; and, accord- 
ing to New Testament usage (with but one ex- 
ception—vi. 3), the term denotes good angels, 
never the bad only, nor yet the two classes to- 
gether. Only in case we take the word ‘spec- 
tacle” in a bad sense, indicating an object for 
mocking and malicious enjoyment, can we sup- 
pose bad angels to be intended. We should then 
be compelled to take the term “world” as a 
designation of the entire realm of beings hostile 
to the Gospel. This, however, would be an 
arbitrary interpretation (see Meyer). While 
then by ‘“‘men’’ we understand all on earth, of 
every sort, who observe the Apostles’ wants and 
suffering, the ‘‘angels” can only mean those 
who from above look down in loving sympathy 
and wonder at the Apostles’ steadfastness. Such 
are the cloud of witnesses in the midst of which 
Paul feels that he and his associates are exhi- 
bited for a spectacle. Comp. Osi., and passages 
like Luke xxii. 43; Matth. iv. 11; Heb. xii. 22; 
1 Pet. i. 12. On the contrary, Luther, Neander, 
Bisping, Besser, interpret the word, of angels 
and men, both good and evil. Besser says: “50 
the world, both angels and men, are divided in 
respect to the Apostles and their ministry. It is 
a spiritual battle, to which the Gospel trumpet 
summons the hosts in heaven and on earth, in 
the atmosphere and the whole visible circuit. 
The scene presented to the eyes of men, is but 
an image of that which goes on behind the cur- 
tain.” 

Ver. 10. [** Again the bitterest irony: ‘how 
different our lot from yours! How are you to 
be envied—we to be pitied!’ Atrorp]. He 
begins witha contrast lying nearest his thought. 
—We, fools for Christ’s sake.—‘ Are” is 
understood. He means: ‘we pass for fools, be- 
cause we preach Christ crucified, and propose to 
know nothing else.’ Osiander’s explanation tran- 
scends the simple meaning of the words: ‘I am 
content out of love for Christ and his cause to 
pass for a fool.’—but ye, wise in Christ,—z.e., 
they, in their union with Christ (not, ‘in the 
Church,” nor, ‘in the doctrine” of Christ), are 
very knowing, full of insight. This is ironical. 
They fancy themselves such, and seek to pass 
for such, in their efforts to combine Christianity 
and secular wisdom. —we, weak, — ἀσϑενεῖς 
signifies a lack of energy, which any superficial 
observer might suppose to characterize the 
Apostle, by reason of his modest reserve on the 
one hand, and of his suffering condition on the 
other. (Comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 4; x. 10). “The 
word expresses the prevailing tone of the Apos- 


CHAP. IV. 6-13. 





tle’s mind—a consciousness of weakness, by virtue 
of which he was the better able to receive strength 
from God.” ΝΈΑΝΡΕΒ. (See ii. 8).—but ye, 
strong.— Io yvpoi suggests the idea of a bold, 
energetic forth-putting, which carried the ap- 
pearance of assumption, and ‘‘a proud parade 
of abilities that were derived from the Lord.” 
With this, there is closely connected the condi- 
tion, which, by reversing the order of the con- 
trast, is presented first.—ye, glorious,—’ Evdogoz 
z. e., in honor and authority, by reason of your 
wisdom and power.—but we, despised.— 
ΚΑτιμοι, i. e., void of esteem, in disgrace, as seen 
in the shameful treatment received. To supply 
the words: ‘‘on account of Christ,” and: ‘‘in 
Christ,” in the second and third antithesis, is 
unnecessary, although it would yield fitting 
sense. 

Vers. 11-13.—He here leaves the antithesis, 
and goes on to enlarge upon the destitution and 
ignominy endured by the Apostles. [His irony, 
too, gives way to deep, earnest feeling, awakened 
in view of all he had‘encountered for Christ and 
for the Church; and his spirit mellows to the 
kindlier mood which speaks in ver. 14].—unto 
this present hour.—The designation stands 
in contrast with the ‘‘already” of ver.8. [While 
they seemed to have got through trials into 
triumphs, he was still in the midst of trouble ].— 
we both hunger and thirst and are in 
want of clothing.—Tvywretew, 2 Cor. xi. 27; 
Matth. xxv. 36; Jas. ii. 15; Is. lviii. 7. [On 
the form of this verb see Winer, 3 xvi. ‘From 
γυμνός one would expect γυμνίτης and accordingly 
the best codd. have in this place, γυμνίτευομεν, 
which we must not, with Fr. and Meyer, take 
for an orthographical error.” ].—and are buf- 
fetted. — Κολαφίζεσϑαι, to be beaten with fists 
(comp. Matth. xxvi. 67; 1 Pet. ii. 20.—and 
have no certain dwelling place.—dacra- 
τοῦμεν. The word occurs only here,—lit., 
are without fixed abode—and points to flights amid 
persecutions [such as Paul often was obliged to 
make; and why not also to his perpetual journey- 
ings, having given up home to be the continual 
missionary that he was?]|—and we labor,— 
From pains he turns to toils. (Comp. ix. 6; 2 
Cor. xi. 7; 1 Thess. ii. 9; Acts xviii. 3).— 
working,—~. ¢., as a hired person,—with our 
own hands.—According to Greek notions, this 
involved a sort of disgrace (ariuia).—Being 
reviled we bless.—He here goes on to exhibit 
his self-denial in still other forms, as shown in 
his deportment under ill usage. ‘In requital for 
wicked words of execration (λοιδορεῖν), we give 
good words of benediction (evAoyeiv).’—Being 
persecuted we suffer it.—. 6., under a per- 
sistent and active hostility (διώκειν) we exhibit a 
patience, which refrains fron retaliation or 
resistence, and lets all pass (aveyéodar).—being 
defamed, we entreat.—For slanderous speech- 
es (δυσφημεῖν) we return dissuasions (παρακαλεῖν, 
entreaties that such things may not happen, not 
intercessions before God [as Calvin; but Stanley 
says: (1) ‘we offer consolation,’ or (2) as in ver. 
16, ‘we entreat men to follow our example,’ 
comp. 2 Cor.i. 3]. The reading βλασφημούμενοι, 
is indeed well supported [see under the text], 
and it means essentially the same thing.— 
Whether godless cursings are also therein im- 


7 





97 





plied, is at least doubtful, since this idea comes 
in only when God is the object of the blasphemy. 
[But why should not this idea enter here as well, 
when Paul carried on himself the name of Christ 
which was blasphemed in him? ‘This was the 
sorest spot on which a true Apostle could be 
attacked. Hence in this word his statements 
reach a climax]. In these declarations Paul 
gives us to understand, not (as Meyer) that the 
Apostles were so very destitute of honor among 
men, that they did not care to vindicate them- 
selves against their villifiers (as persons do who 
have honor to maintain), but that they sought 
honor itself by thus requiting and overcoming 
evil with good. (Comp. Matth. v. 44; Luke 
xxiii. 84; Acts vii. 60; Rom. vii. 14,17; 1 Pet. 
iii. 9). 

Finally, he returns to the simple exhibition of 
the dishonor into which they were cast, and sets 
it forth in deepest colors and at the extremest 
point.—as the refuse of the world have we 
become.—Mey.: ‘It is as if we were the scum, 
the vilest dregs of mankind.’ This idea, how- 
ever, would not be lost if, with Luther and otllers, 
we were to translate the word περικαϑάρματα: 
sin offerings, in allusion to an ancient custom 
(the continuance of which, however, to the time 
of the Apostle cannot be confidently asserted, or 
that it was so far held in popular remembrance 
that the expression would be readily understood 
in this sense), viz., that of devoting to death the 
vilest men, such as slaves and malefactors, in 
seasons of public calamity, for the purpose of 
conducting off from the rest the wrath of the 
Deity. These homines piaculares were indeed 
designated by the simpler word κάϑαρμα; but in 
Proy. xxi. 18, the LXX. gives περικάϑαρμα for 


the Hebrew 455; sin offering. It denotes puri- 


fication, remotely, expiation; but also, that which 
is purged away, filth, refuse, offal; in Arrian, a 
reprobate man, an outcast. [Calvin says that 
‘‘Paul, in adding the preposition περὶ, seems to 
have had an eye to the expiatory rite itself, inas- 
much as those unhappy men, who were devoted 
to execrations, were led around through the 
streets, that they might carry away with them 
whatever there was of evil in any corner, that 
the cleansing might be more complete.” Hodge 
thinks any such allusion improbable, in conse- 
quence, of the uncommonness of the custom. 
‘‘Paul,” he says, ‘certainly did not consider 
himself or his sufferings as a propitiation for 
other men. The point of comparison, if there be 
any allusion to the custom in question, is to the 
vileness of the victims which were always chosen 
from the worthless and the despised.””] Luther’s. 
interpretation, given above, accords well with 
what follows.—and of all things the off- 
scouring.unto this day.—repiyyua, that which: 
is wiped off (repupdv) in cleansing, scrapings and 
filings. This word also occurs in the formula 
with which the human victims, who were put: 
under the curse, were ordinarily consecrated:: 
περίψημα ἡμῶν γίνου ----ἦτοι σωτηρία καὶ ἀπολύτρ-. 
ὡσις : be thou our expiation, that which by us is. 
set apart for the purification of the rest (Suidas). 
Meyer’s objection that in this case the plural, . 
περιψήματα, would be required, because each indi-. 
vidual would be regarded as a separate sis 


98 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
ee ee a eee 


offering, nardly suffices to set aside this objection, 
since all the Apostles may be taken collectively 
as composing one such offering. The Genitives, 
κόσμου,---πάντων: the world’ 8,----οὔ all (which stand 
first as emphatic) by this explanation, denote 
those whose curse lights on them, and in behalf 
of whom they are sacrificed. [In the second 
edition, which is posthumous, the editor adds], 
nevertheless without the περι, in περικάϑαρμα, hay- 
ing anything to do with this (analogously with the 
phrase περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας), or without any support 
being given to the assumption of any expiatory 
virtue in the Apostle’s sufferings. But although 
the idea of expiation and deliverance through 
another’s sufferings, especially of the guilty party, 
comes elsewhere prominently forward, and this 
is the strongest designation of fellowship in the 
sufferings of Christ, who was reckoned among 
the transgressors; and although the Apostle 
speaks of his official sufferings in images drawn 
from the sacrificial phraseology, in order to ex- 
press the greatness and sanctity of the end they 
furthered, viz., blessing for the Church and the 
world: yet this thought is foreign to our context, 
and, all things considered, the explanation given 
in the translation deserves the preference.— 
Here we have a description of the deepest dis- 
grace. [Wordsworth ingeniously argues for the 
sacrificial idea]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1. The promised glory of believers not to be re- 
alized here on earth, as the Corinthians seemed to 
imply by their conduct]. The true view of 
Christ and of Christianity combines an Idealism 
anda Realism. On the one hand, in Christ old 
things have passed away and all things become 
new. (2 Cor. v.17). He who believes in Christ 
has eternal life (Jno. iii. 36); God has quickened 
us in Christ, and has raised us up together, and 
made us to sit together in heavenly places in 
Christ (Epk. ii. 5 ff.). But on the other hand, 
it doth not yet appear what we shall be (1 
Jno. iii. 2); our life is hid with Christ in God 
(Col. iii. 3); we here walk by faith, not by sight 
(2 Cor. v. 7); we are indeed saved, but it is in 
hope (Rom. viii. 24).—This latter side of Chris- 
tianity, which is betokened in the very cross- 
bearing character of Christ’s kingdom, is utterly 
misapprehended by a false idealism, which would 
anticipate in this life the glory of Christ’s king- 
dom, shrinks from all manner of sufferings and 
trials, loves to luxuriate in self-satisfaction and 
in the enjoyment of the riches and the glory 
which are in Christ, and seeks to make an 
impression abroad with the show of higher 
learning and science, so that Christianity shall 
attain to honor and authority and influence in 
the world, in accordance with the truth that 
Christ is the Lord to whom all power in heaven 
and upon earth belongs—a truth, which it is 
claimed, must manifest itself more and more in 
the outward condition of those who are his. 
This idealism is the fruitful source of various 
forms of fanaticism, from the anticipation of the 
regal glory of Christ by the Romish hierarchy, 
and from the grossest Chiliasm which aims to 
set up a sort of secularized kingdom of God (as 
seen in the Anabaptists of the 16th century), 


down to the most refined theories of a progress 
sive spiritual transformation, according to which 
Christianity is gradually to pervade the whole 
human race in all spheres of life, and to over- 
come all opposition, until at last it get posses- 
sion of, and assimilate to itself, all governments 
and social customs, and art and science, and 
thus appear in full glory. In all this we see a 
Pelagianizing ignoring of the sharp contrast, 
which exists between the present condition of 
the world, rooted as it is the life of nature, and 
the spirit of Christ; also, a vain self-sufficiency, 
which hopes to find in the attainment of certain 
results, in the relative improvement of our 
earthly conditions, in the glow which the sun of 
truth and righteousness may cast over human 
affair8, in the reformation effected by the Gospel 
in all departments of human society,—in short, in 
the modification of the natural by the spiritual, a 
form of life springing out of, and developing itself 
from the spiritual unto the natural, and so 
dreams of a progressive realization of the king~- 
dom of God onearth. Of an apostasy, of a fear- 
ful catastrophe, of antichrist and his overthrow, 
of a new heavens and a new earth following upon 
the destruction of the old, it evinces no know- 
ledge. All this it quietly ignores. Hence all 
that glory which the promises of God’s Word 
exhibit to our hope, and reserve for a future age 
altogether different from the present, it assumes 
to have already in this, by a gradual, ceaseless, 
progressive development. The beginnings of 
such notions were already discernible in the 
Corinthian Church during the life of Paul, and 
with great soberness he encounters it by an ex- 
hibition of the actual state of things with the 
Apostles themselves—a state of things which was 
of a far different sort. According to the mind 
and precedent of Christ, he shows them that the 
passage to glory lies through sufferings. (Luke 
xiv. 27; Acts xiv. 22; Jno. xii. 24). But this 
the worldly-minded would fain overleap, passing 
round the vale of humiliation, trouble, persecu- 
tion and self-denial, to enter at once into the full 
possession of glory. They shrink from the cross. 
Hence when it comes to hard conflicts and severe 
tests, they are readily shaken, and are scandal- 
ized, and seduced into error, and exposed to 
apostasy. 


2. A spectacle to angels. An encouraging ~ 


thought, rooted in the idea of a one all-embracing 
kingdom of God. As in Christ and through Him 
and to Him all things were created, which are in 
heaven and on earth (Col. i. 16 ff.), so has it 
pleased God to gather together in Him all things, 
which are in heaven and upon earth (Eph,i,10),— 
in Him, through whom the angelic as well as the 
human world shall be restored to their original 
harmony with God (comp. Meyer on Col. i.20),— 
and through whose church unto principalities 
and powers in heayen shall be made known the 
manifold wisdom of God (Eph. iii. 8; comp. 1 
Pet. i. 12). Hence these heavenly spirits are 
full of liveliest interest in God’s redemptive work 
on earth, Those very beings, who have by God’s 
grace, been set in such close relations with 
earth’s little ones as to be called ‘their angels,” 
who have been sent ‘‘to minister for them whe 
should be heirs of salvation,” and who “rejoice 
over the sinner that repenteth,” are also sympa 


a 


CHAP. IV. 6-18. 


SSS 


thizing witnesses of the conflicts and sufferings 
of God’s co-laborers in the work of redemption. 
_And while human observers are differently im- 
pressed with these same scenes, yet in this hea- 
venly host there is felt nothing but astonishment 
and joy in view of the steadfastness and patience 
exhibited. Moreover, as an angel from heaven 
was seen to strengthen our Lord in the hour of 
His agony, so in the darkest hour of the conflict 
will angels be near to quicken and strengthen 
the soldiers of the cross. The encouragement 
and confirmation accruing to these oppressed 
sufferers and fighters of the good fight, from the 
consciousness of sympathy from such witnesses, 
corresponds to that which is said in Heb. xii. 1, 
in reference to the great cloud of witnesses, com- 
posed of the ancient heroes of the faith, and of 
the believers looking to Jesus the author and 
finisher of our faith. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[1. Spiritual pride, self-sufficiency, vain-glorying, 
assumption of superiority, are so unbecoming and 
absurd as to be the fit objects not only of severe re- 
buke, but also of ridicule; for: 1. they are con- 
trary to a Christian’s dependence on God for 
what he is and*has (ver. 7); 2. they proceed 
upon the false assumption, that the glory and 
the crown belong to the present age, whereas 
they are only to be enjoyed after Christ comes, 
and the whole church can possess them together 
(ver. 8); 3. they are contrary to apostolic exam- 
ple. The Apostles were cross-bearers all their 
lives through, and looked for the crown hereafter. 
(ver. 9-13) ]. 

[2. Indignant reproof, irony, sarcasm, satire, are 
legitimate means for correction and discipline. 
But like the instruments of a surgeon, they are 
as dangerous as they are keen and useful, and 
can be safely employed only by skilful hands and 
loving hearts. When badly managed they kill 
rather than cure. Let none attempt to handle 
them, unless like Paul they are conscious only 
of the sincerest paternal affection towards those 
on whom they are used. Malice in the heart is 
sure to poison their edge, while love conveys 
healing balm through the wounds they make]. 

Srarke :—Ver. 7. Whose is the fine plumage? 
Hast thou borrowed it? How then, supposing 
the wind should carry it away? Where is thy 
boasting then? Give then to God his own, and 
do not serve either thyself or the devil with thy 
gifts. (Hed.).—Ver. 8. Desire not here in time 
what is only to be had yonder in Eternity. 
Here is strife; there alone is perfect rest and 
glory.—Ver. 9. They who are adorned with 
greatest gifts, have the greatest trials for their 
humiliation.—Ver. 10. External influence, happi- 
ness, glory, are no signs of a true Church. Who 
are the best Christians? The wise, the strong, 
the lordly? No. They are the weak, the de- 
spised, those who for Christ’s sake are willing to 
be as fools.—Ver. 11. Thou complainest of perse- 
' cution in thy office? Consider, has it come to 
hunger, thirst, nakedness, blows? Hast thou 
‘resisted unto blood?” The crown is given to 
the soldier who has ‘endured hardness.’—Ver. 
12. A person is not required to preach without 
pay. Yet be content 


Be ae RS ee ee On SS Se SS ee ee EES Eee se εν δ τ τος eee ee 


Do not desert thy office | his foes would allow him to remain. 


99 








because of a small salary. To do good and ta 
suffer evil are the peculiar tokens of a true ser- 
vant of Christ. The Christion’s proper weapong 
in persecution are patience and prayer.—Ver. 
13. The true children of God uuderstand wel\ 
the greatness of their spiritual nobility, and 
that this, so far from being sullied by the base 
treatment of the world, is only made more illus- 
trious thereby. ~ 
Rircer:—Instead of courting admiration for 
Christianity, and admiring in turn those who 
admire us and our cause, it becomes us to root 
ourselves more deeply in a self-denying spirit. 
One chief characteristic of godlessness is lowli- 
ness of mind, which gives to God all the praise, 
and counts men for nothing.—When we are will- 
ing to rend the bond of peace for the sake of 
aught we prize, we act not as if we had received 
it from the Lord whose gifts are to be appropri- 
ated in love, but as if we were at liberty to turn 
it all to our own selfish uses and advantage.— 
Where danger is greatest, there oftentimes pre- 
sumption and self-confidence are at the height. 
The faithful performance of duty in the midst of 
shame, and detraction, and persecution, is a 
spectacle which angels cannot but admire, and 
men regard with honor. How many are dis- 
posed to leave cross-bearing to the Apostles and 
early Christians, and to maintain a Christianity 
in which the world will find nothing to hate. 
Hevupner:—VEeER.7. True humility springs from 
a sense of our absolute dependence on God. This 
guards from pride. With this there belongs 
also a clear recognition of God’s greatness and 
glory; we must feel that God is every thing, and 
we nothing. Only an exalted nature can be truly 
humble. How foolish our pride over advantages 
that we did not procure. The more gifts received 
from God, the greater the cause to be humble. 
Pride is not mere folly; it is wickedness also, be- 
cause it robs God of His glory.—Ver. 8. Judging 
from their outward condition, God appears often 
to treat believers, not as if they were His chil- 
dren, but as if they were the vilest of the race. 
But the more He puts on us, the more we are 
observed. The holy angels, unseen, rejoice when 
they see us victorious. Devils look ony hoping 
that we may succumb.—Ver. 10. Christians, 
when most deserving, are often the most derided. 
The dishonor put upon the primitive believers is 
a mortifying rebuke to our pride. What a con- 
trast between the cross-bearing Apostles and 
the later clergy, with their costly tables, splen- 
did array, their pomp, and retinues, and palaces! 
—Ver. 12. Paul an example of noble indepen- 
dence. He earned his own bread. 
GossNER:—VER. 6. We were made to be hum- 
ble, and should be kept short. Too much honor 
should not be shown usinthislife. If you 866 ἃ 
person exalting himself above others, look for no 
further evidence of his folly.—Ver. 8. Even in 
our time, there are among the awakened some, 
who feel already perfect, and satisfied, and rich, 
from mere knowledge, while their fellowship with 
the Saviour and love for Him has grown cold.— 
Ver. 11. The disciple of Jesus moves through 
this world always a stranger, nowhere tolerated, 
nowhere at home; and even should he settle any 
where, it is uncertain how long the world and 
In such ἃ 


100 

JSR Sete! 
case comfort comes from Christ.—Ver. 18, It is 
better to be the offscouring, than the honored of 
the world; better a castaway, than the bosom- 
child of a wicked race. The Saviour chose 
shame, the Apostles also, and we should arm 
ourselves With the same mind. 

W.T Besser:—Ver. 7. Nothing is mine but my 
sin; 20thing, not saving knowledge and sanctify- 
ins Wisdom, not repentance, not faith, nor love; 
m short, nothing Christian, have I from myself. 
It is all grace received—a gift from God (Jas. i. 
17). To have received and then to boast is a 
hateful inconsistency. Gratitude and praise 
alone are becoming to recipients—accordant 
praise from all recipients of the manifold grace of 
God. In scorning thy brother less gifted, take 
heed that thou findest not fault with God.—Ver. 
8. What, already satisfied! This is self-decep- 
tion. Satisfaction, without hungering and thirst- 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ing, comes only when we behold God’s face in 
righteousness and awake in His likeness (Ps. 
xvii. 15).—Ver. 11. Christian fasting is of two 
kinds—one when a person fasts voluntarily for 
the sake of serving the Lord with lighter spirit, 
the other when one is compelled to it as a Chris- 
tian for Christ’s sake (2 Cor. xi. 27).—Ver. 12. 
If we cannot stop the mouths of our defamerg 


with soft words of entreaty, we have still one re-- 


sort: we can pray that God will ‘not lay the sin 
to their charge.’ The prosperity which the Co- 
rinthians sought upon earth was then, and is now, 
to be had only at the cost of separating from the 
Apostles and from the true Gospel.—While all the 
Corinthian glory is but as stubble, the crown of 
honor will rest ever fresh and green upon the 
heads of the despised Apostles, both in Heaven 
and upon earth. ἶ 


IX.—PATERNAL ADDRESSES AND WARNINGS. 


A.* The grounds, spirit and intent of his severity. 


As their spiritual father, he would have them imi- 


tate him. 


Cuarprter IV. 14-17. 


14 
15 monish] you. 


I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn" [ad- 
For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not 


many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten [begot] you through the 


16 gospel. 


Wherefore I beseech you, be [become] ye followers [imitators] of me. 


17 For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my? beloved son, and faithful 
in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ’, as 


I teach every where in every church. 


1 Ver. 14.—The variation νουθετῶν [found in A. Cod. Sin.] is a supposed improvement, made for the purpose of uni- 


formity with ἐντρέπων. 


2 Ver. 17.—Instead of the Rec. τέκνον μον. Tischendorf [Alf., Stanley] read μου τέκνον according to A. B. C. [Cod. Sin.] 


and others. 


[The Rec. is a correction to the more usual order.” ALF.]. 


3 Ver. 17.—Lach. reads Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ [after C. D2. Cod. Sin. Vulg. etc.]. Others, κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ [after Dl. F.]. But the 
Rec. Χριστῷ is best supported [being found in A. B. D8. L. and in most citations of the Fathers]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 14. Sinking now into a milder tone, 
‘not from motives of prudence, but in accordance 
with his own natural disposition,’ (Neander), 
and in order to observe his own precept, ‘not to 
provoke children to wrath,’ (Besser), he here 
goes on to explain the ground and intent of the 
severity he had used. He had rebuked them, as 
a father would his children, out of paternal love, 
and as he hada right to do.—Not shaming 
you,—vtpézwv. The participle here does not 
necessarily involve the idea of intention or de- 
sign, as if it meant: ‘not for the purpose of 
shaming you;’ although the present part. may 
denote a purpose which one is already on the 


[* This section has been divided on account of the manifest 
difference between the two parts]. 


point of realizing. Meyer: ‘I do not shame you 
by that which I now write,’ (7. e., from vv. 8-13). 
Ruckert’s idea, that Paul alludes here to his 
charges for not being properly supported (vv. 
11 and 12) is too restricted, and unsustained by 
the context. Alike needless, also, is his explana- 
tion of évrpérecv, to cast down, to shatter, as it 
occurs in Aelian. And at all events, the word 
cannot mean, as elsewhere in Greek, to restore to 
a right mind, to cause a person to come to himself. 
The Apostle commonly uses it in the sense in 
which it usually occurs in the LXX., for ΘΓ, 


to shame, in connection with aicybvecdac (seo 
Frommii Concord.) (comp. 2 Thess. iii. 14; Tit, 
ii. 8; also the subst. ἐντροπή 1 Cor. vi. 5; xv. 
84).—do I write these things—raira, ἵ. δ.» 
the things written from the eighth to the thir- 
teenth verse,—but as my beloved children. 
—A tender and winning word, designed to ree 


a 


CHAP. IV. 14-17. 


101 





mind them that, with all his severity toward 
their pride and false security, he yet regarded 
them with paternal affection, and was only seek- 
ing their restoration to a right mind.—gI ad- 
monish you.—Novvereiv, to bring to mind, to 
warn.—It may imply severe rebuke or friendly 
admonition. Here it is evidently the latter. 

See more fully on this word Trench Syn. JN. 

.’ sub voce, and Wm. Webster, Syntax and Sy- 
nonymns of the Gr. T.]. 

Ver. 15. He justifies his right toadmonish on 
the ground of the paternal relation he sustains 
to them. This he exhibits in contrast with the 
mere preceptorship held by their other teachers. 
To the latter they were indebted only for disci- 
pline, but to him they owed their spiritual exis- 
tence.—For even though.—By virtue of the 
relation of the two clauses indicated by ἀλλ᾽, ἐάν 
carries the significance of κἄν, even though—ye 
have ten thousand.—Mvpiouc implies only an 
indefinitely large number, as in xiv. 19. Bisp.: 
‘never so many,’—a hint, perhaps, that there 
were too many teachers there,—instructors— 
matdaywyovc. This word among the Greeks 
designated those who were employed to look 
after, and train little children; and these were 
commonly slaves. Paul here applies it to the 
teachers who succeeded him (iii. 10ff.), but 
without any bad implication [such as Calvin, 
Beza and de Wette suppose], since this would 
not befit Apollos and others like him. Nor can 
we well conceive the term to imply that those 
whom it designated were holding the Corinthians 
back in rudimental knowledge [Calvin] (Gal. iv. 
2), or were acting upon a stand-point that sought 
to unite legal and evangelical elements. All he 
means is that his right over them was higher, 
his relation to them more intimate than that of 
any other could be; and that these allowed him 
the privilege of supervising their education in 
their new Christian life.—in Christ.—This ad- 
junct shows the sphere in which these instructors 
were supposed to labor, that of the Christian life. 
[Hodge says, that ‘“‘the words in the original 
show that they belong to the verb, ‘Though ye may 
have in Christ, 7. e. in reference to Christ, or as 
Christians, many instructors yet have ye not 
many fathers.’’’ ]—yet not many fathers, for 
in Christ Jesus.—Here again, as before, the 
words ‘‘in Christ Jesus,’”’ denote the element in 
which Paul labored._-I begot you.—i. 6. as 
Christians. On γεννᾷν comp. Phil. 10; Gal. iv. 
19. Others connect the words ‘in Christ Jesus’ 
with ‘I,’ and make it mean: ‘I in Christ,’ 7. 6. as 
‘an Apostle in Christ.’ But as this designation 
in the foregoing clause does not belong to ‘in- 
structors’ in any such way as to mean, that they 
instructed by virtue of their fellowship with 
Christ, so here it is not to be similarly connected 
with Paul, although it was in itself true, that 
those labors of his, which begot in them the new 
life, and developed it afterwards, could have 
proved successful only so far as they had been 
wrought in Christ—through the Gospel.— 
Here we have the instrumentality employed. It 
was the proclamation of those good tidings which 
are briefly summed up in Jno. iii. 16; 1 Tim. i. 
15, and elsewhere. The Gospel is ‘the power of 
God unto salvation to every one that believeth’ 
(Rom. i. 16); ‘the word of the cross;’ ‘the word 





of truth,’ by which God begets us (Jas. i. 18); 
‘the living,’ the undestructible seed of the new 
birth (1 Pet.i. 23). And the essential substance 
of this Gospel, that which gives it its quickening 
and nourishing power, is Christ Himself [the 
Word in the word.] The claim to paternity here 
put forth, is in no way prejudicial to the father- 
hood of God, or the Lordship of Christ, since 
Paul is here speaking of the relation which 
the Church sustained to the different teachers in 
respect to the origin and growth of their spiritual 
life. The higher absolute relation to God is here 
presupposed, and even intimated by the phrases 
(ἴῃ Christ’? and ‘through the Gospel.” The 
simple instrumentality, alluded to in the whole 
case, is evident of itself; just as in 1 Tim. iv. 16. 

Ver. 17. Therefore :—i. 6. because I am to 
you as a father, and it accords with the analogy 
of nature, that children should resemble their 
parents.—I beseech you.—An affectionate en- 
treaty to heed one brief request.—be ye imita- 
tors of me.—But how far? Not in general; 
but in those particulars which he has just been 
enumerating, wherein he stood in such striking 
contrast with them, vzz., in humility and self-resig- 
nation; ‘‘in the renouncement of all ambition and 
conceit’? Meyer; we might also add with Osi- 
ander, ‘in that self-devoted heroism with which 
he sealed his faith.’ [‘‘Nor these only,” says 
Alf., ‘‘but also, as in ver. 17, in his manner of 
life and teaching”’]. 

Ver. 18. For this cause.—This is to be re- 
ferred back either to ver. 15, as expressing the 
motive of his sending Timothy: ‘because I am 
your father, and feel towards you like one’ [as 
Chrys., Theoph. and others]; or to ver. 16, as 
indicating the purpose of his sending him: to 
promote your imitation of me. The latter refe- 
rence is to be preferred, otherwise ver. 16 must 
be taken parenthetically. Osiander combines 
both, and justly, in so far as what is said in ver. 
16, rests upon the paternal relationship asserted 
in ver. 15. The meaning is: ‘since I, as a 
father, must insist on your imitating my example, 
I have sent unto you my dear Timothy, who will 
aid you in this respect.’—I have sent to you 
Timothy—not as though Timothy was to be 
the bearer of the Epistle (comp. Acts xvi. 10), 
since he came later, being obliged to go through 
Macedonia on his way to Corinth (Acts xix. 22), 
—who is my son.—Timothy is here repre- 
sented as one who, equally with the Corinthians, 
was converted by Paul, and had derived through 
him his spiritual life, and so held the same rela- 
tions to Paul that they did. And the Apostle 
testifies to his tender care over them in the fact, 
that he sends to them this their brother, who 
was especially dear to him, and enjoyed his fullest 
confidence; one, therefore, whom they had pecu- 
liar reason to welcome cordially, as a person able 
to exhibit to them the mind of their common 
father in a most reliable manner. [It must be 
remembered also that Timothy was with Paul 
during his first visit to Corinth, and must there- 
fore have been personally known to a large por- 
tion of the Church]. To explain the epithet 
‘my son,’ on the ground that Timothy had been 
educated to his office by Paul, after the manner 
that the Rabbis called their scholars ‘sons,’ is 
not sufficiently sustained by the consideration 


102 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE ΟΟΒΙΝΤΉΙΑΝΞ. 


NN ee 


that we have no further information of his con- 
version by Paul. Rather the intimacy of the 
relation between the two expressions in Tim. i. 
2,18; 2 Tim. i. 2, and also the application to him 
of the same title, ‘beloved son,’ which had just 
been applied to the Corinthians, would seem to 
confirm the opinion that Paul had also ‘begotten 
him through the Gospel.’—beloved and faith- 
ful in the Lord.—The phrase ‘in the Lord’ 
belongs not merely to ‘faithful,’ (ἡ, ὁ. devoted to 
me, true to his calling, and therefore reliable) 
but also to all that is said of Timothy. The 
praise bestowed on Timothy appears also to have 
the incidental purpose of impressing upon the 
Corinthians, in a tender manner, the kind of 
conduct which they owed to their spiritual 
fathers. 

Timothy’s errand is expressed in the words :— 
who shall remind you of my ways in the 
Lord.—The ἀναμιμνήσκειν : to remind, presupposes 
the existence of a knowledge which has been 
repressed by adverse influences, so that it needs 
to be called up again and refreshed. ‘There is 
a slight implication here ” (Osiander), and Chry- 
sostom remarks that ‘the word is finely chosen 
to quiet the pride of the Corinthians which might 
be aroused at the idea of being taught by a 
youth.’ What he means by ‘his ways in Christ? 
he goes on to explain.—as I teach every 
where in every church.—It was his mode of 
conduct as a Christian teacher; and this, as it 
regarded, not so much the subject of his teaching, 
or its manner, as his demeanor while doing it,— 
the humility and self-denial with which he dis- 
charged his calling. This is implied by the 
connection. The use of καϑώς here, as employed 
to introduce a defining clause, in the sense of: 
how, is somewhat remarkable. See Acts xy. 
14; 3 John, 3 [where the word is clearly used 
in this sense, and where Alford somewhat arbi- 
trarily asserts that itis alone thus used]. Hence 
Billr. joins it to the verb ‘remind,’ as if Paul 
meant: ‘he will remind you, ete., just as I my- 
self teach.’ But from this 1, no good sense can 
be obtained, and 2, ‘myself’ is arbitrary. Osi- 
ander’s explanation, though suitable in sense, is 
yet somewhat forced: ‘who will remind you of 
my walk (my course of life), agreeably to which 
I teach everywhere.’ The first explanation has 
the most in its favor, in spite of its grammatical 
difficulties. The ‘reminding’ could however 
refer to his activity in other churches also, since 
they undoubtedly had knowledge of this, from 
information which had been given by brethren 
on their travels. The reference to this unifor- 
mity of his conduct generally, strengthened the 
motive for their imitating him. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1, Spiritual paternity.—The awakening of the 
spiricual life in man is a Divine act. It originates 
in God’s purpose of salvation, formed in reference 
to the individual (Jas. i. 18; Eph. i. 4; 2 Thess. 
ii. 13). Its ground is Christ, in His complex 
divine-human life as carried out in the work of 
redemption, which was effected through His death 
and resurrection and final glorification (Jno. vii. 
8%). Its immediate cause is the Holy Spirit, who 
imparts to the redeemed the new life of Christ, 


proceeding from his death; or, in other words 
reproduces in us individually the new man of 
righteousness, born in Christ through a judicial 
process of death passed upon the old man or the 
flesh. The organ of this Spirit is the Word, 
viz., the testimony of Christ, and concernin 
Christ, which proceeds from Him; and the objec 
and substantial contents of which He Himself is. 
By bringing this living Word forcibly to bear 
upon the heart, the Spirit opens the heart. Tes: 
tifying to sinners of the love of God cherished 
towards them individually in Christ, he regains 
their lost confidence; and starts the fountaims of 
all godly life, of all holy conduct towards God,— 
in obedience and patience; and puts an end to 
the old distrust, that was the source of all-rebel- 
lion and sin. And he does this in a way to mag- 
nify God and belittle man, and to convert the 
sinner’s pride to humility. 

But inasmuch as in this process of renewal 
God employs human instrumentalities, he confers 
on these also the dignity of a spiritual father- 
hood, and so takes them into a sort of fellowship 
with Himself. This holds good, however, not of 
those who have become, so to speak, the acci- 
dental instruments in this work, 7. e., who have 
in some way brought about the conversion of 
souls either by speaking or writing saving truths, 
the force of which they have not practically felt, 
but only of those who have the life of Christ in 
them as an energizing power, and who can, out 
of their own personal experiences, testify of 
Him, and of His enlightening and regenerating 
grace, and who are therefore in a condition to 
beget a kindred life in others. Standing in 
Christ as the ground of their life, and moving 
ever in Him, such persons are enabled to intro- 
duce others into the same communion, by pre- 
senting tothem, in quickening power through the 
Gospel, Jesus Christ in the fulness of His holy 
love and in His redeeming work, and by thus 
inducing them to come out from themselves and 
give themselves up to Him who has given and 
will yet give Himself for them. In this way they 
become spiritual fathers; for it is by virtue of the 
living power of Christ dwelling in them that they 
are capable of engendering life in others, just as 
in the sphere of the physical life, the natural 
creative power, resident in the individual as a 
personal property, involves in its generative ex- 
ercise the character and dignity of the paternal 
relation. 

But the more clearly and simply this spiritual 
paternity is recognized and maintained upon its 


Divine ground, the more decisively will all further ~ 


educational efforts on the part of the earthly 
parent result in bringing these spiritual children 
out*from their first dependence on him (a depen- 
dence which often involves an unworthy attach- 
ment to his personal idiosyncracies), and fasten- 
ing them more exclusively upon Him, who is the 
eternal and absolute ground of this relation, 
even God in Christ. The children are thus 
liberated from all that is limited and imperfect 
in the human parent, to enter upon a freer and 
more independent development in Christ, and 
thus to make purer advances in knowledge and 
holiness. 

But this spiritual paternity carries with it 8 
high authority, a holy right to discipline, to re¢ 


CHAP. IV. 14-17. 





103 


SS . 


buke, to exhort, to purify, with severity or mild- | idle, self-indulgent, self-satisfied spirit, or as- 
ness, or both commingled, as circumstances may | pire only after honors and applause. 


demand. And this right is exercised as one of 


To set a worthy example is the duty not only 


love, and under love’s strong impulses, and with | of Apostles and ministers, but of all Christians 


that ingenuous wisdom which is peculiar to love, 
and with which it devises all sorts of methods 
for alluring, urging, restraining, arousing, and 
softening children, restoring their disturbed 
confidence and reéstablishing over them a weak- 
ened authority. 

[‘‘A father never is afraid 

Of speaking angrily to any child 

Since love he knows is justified of love.” ] 

All this is illustrated for us in the Apostle 
Paul. 

2. [Apostolic piety is the standard for the whole 
Church, even to the end of time. The Romish 
theory, which distinguishes between the clergy 
and laity, and imposes on the former a degree 
of sanctity and a mode of life not exacted of the 
Jatter, is here plainly condemned in advance. 
Paul puts all believers on the same footing with 
himself. He lays claim to no special grace, and 
recognizes no obligation to self-denial and sacri- 
fice which does not equally rest on the whole 
Church. In his office as an Apostle, he became 
indeed a spiritual father; but in point of that 
Christian character, which underlay his Apos- 
tleship, he would have his children resemble 
him. Here we learn that the Spirit of Christ 
aims to pervade His entire hody, and seeks 
to mould all, pastors and people alike, to a com- 
mon type. And this spirit is a cross-bearing 
spirit. It is a spirit, which it devolves on every 
minister to exemplify and enforce, and on every 
Church to imbibe and cultivate. There will be 
no abatement of this requisition until Christ 
shall come]. 

ὃ. [Christian example is an important means for 
instructing and edifying the Church. Its uses are: 
1. For dlustration. It is the living’ Epistle, ac- 
companying the written Epistle, in the way of 
comment and explanation. The truth stated’in 
doctrine, example embodies in solid substantial 
forms, that are more fraught with meaning, and 
more vivid in expression than words can be. 
The duty enforced in the precept, it exhibits in 
the operations of a holy life, that teach the true 
method of its performance. Thus the under- 
standing is helped to right conceptions of the 
Word; and the life of God in the Church proves 
the light of the world. 2. For persuasion. ‘‘Words 
teach, but examples draw.” So says the pro- 
verb, and the reason is, that that inward con- 
viction and force of will, which are the secret of 
personal influence, express themselves most sig- 
nificantly in the conduct. It is through this, 
therefore, that man acts most powerfully on 
man. 3. For encouragement. The lives of emi- 
nent believers show the possibility of high at- 
tainment, and a certainty of the divine pro- 
mises; and by the shout of ‘‘victory at last” 
animate the spirits of observers to enter the 
fight of faith, and to do and endure in like man- 
ner, with the full assurance of like results, 4. 
For rebuke. The zeal, energy, courage, patience, 
self-denial and sufferings of every devoted be- 
liever, presents a disparaging and mortifying 
contrast with the conduct of those who, while 
professing a like devotion, evince only an easy 


alike. As Paul called upon the early converts 
to ‘imitate him,’ so were they instructed to live 
so as to extend the same call to others coming 
after them. The guiding word which ought to 
be continually heard passing down the ever 
lengthening ranks of the Church, as it moves 
onward through darkness and through light, 
treading in the footsteps of its great leader, 
should be: ‘Follow me, even as I also follow 
Christ’ ]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


1. [Church founders and all who have been 
instrumental in converting souls should: 1. love 
the subjects of their labors with a paternal af- 
fection, even as they stand towards them in the 
peculiar relation of spiritual fathers (ver. 15); 
2. aim in their reproof, however sharp, a. not to 
mortify and disgrace their spiritual offspring, 
but, ὁ. to admonish and so restore them to duty 
(ver. 14); 3. set an example of the Christian 
life which they shall be able to call on their chil- 
dren to imitate (ver. 16); 4. take pains to show 
them how they live in all their ways, so that 
there shall be no excuse for ignorance or mis- 
take, (ver. 17)]. 

SrarkeE: Nothing is sharper and more pene- 
trating than the rebukes of love, (ver. 14).— 
Hepincer: Ver. 15.—It is the duty and the cha- 
racteristic of a true minister to beget children 
through the Gospel, or to lead those, who have 
been thus begotten, to a further knowledge of 
Christ. No less is it the token of a right-minded 
hearer to suffer himself to be thus begotten 
through the Word, and be trained to maturity in 
Christ. (1 Thess. iv. 1, 10; 1 Pet. ii. 2). A 
preacher must build not only with words but 
also with his life, and so as it were with both 
hands, that he may be an example to believers 
both in word and conversation. It is a shame 
for children to run in strange paths and thus 
degenerate, (ver. 16). The visitation of churches 
by suitable persons is a useful and highly ne- 
cessary practice (ver. 17). 

Beru. Brs.:—It is no small thing to be a spi- 
ritual father and teacher. Only those who are 
mature in Christ are suited for such an office; 
for only according to the measure of our attain- 
ments in the divine life shall we be able to beget 
and fashion other souls. It is, therefore, a pre- 
sumption in those, who are as yet but children, 
to wish to become fathers and teachers, before 
they themselves have rightly learned (ver. 15). 
Who would wish to exhibit himself as a pattern 
for others, before he has himself patterned after 
Christ? (ver. 16). 

Hzvuspner:—Fathers, who carry their children 
on their hearts, mourn over the transgressions 
of their children, long for their reformation, and 
strive to make them blessed. Yea, they would 
be willing to pluck out their own hearts for their 
sake, if so be they might in this way do them 
any good (ver. 15). What joyousness of spirit 
is required to warrant a person in holding him- 
self up as a pattern for others (ver. 16). 


104 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


eS 


[Catvin :—The first token of return to a right 
state of mind is the shame which the son begins 
to feel on being reproached for his fault. Yet 
he who admonishes in a friendly spirit will make 
it his particular care that whatever there is of 
shame, may remain with the individual admo- 
nished, and may in this manner be buried. In 
reproofs use moderation, mixing honey and oil 
with the vinegar. Let it be understood that 
nothing is sought but'the welfare of those re- 
proved (ver. 14).—How few there are that love 
the Churches with a fatherly affection and lay 
themselves out to promote their welfare. Mean- 


while there are many pedagogues who hire out 
their services as it were to discharge a mere 
temporary office, and hold the people in subjec- 
tion and admiration. When I say pedagogues, 1 
do not refer to Popish priests, for 1 would not do 
them the honor of reckoning them in that num- 
ber (ver. 15).—Uniformity and steadfastness of 
conduct ‘‘in every place,’ most important for a 
minister, so that no objection can be brought 
against him, as though he conducted himself 
differently in different places. (Ad sensum) 
(ver. 17)]. 


B. Anticipation of misconception as to his motives in sending Timothy and of consequent arrogance on the 


part of some. 


Such to be tested in point of power. 


The kingdom of God a thing of power. 


Cuarrer IV. 18-21. 


18 Now some are [have been] puffed up, as though I would not come [were not coming] 


19 to you, 


20 speech of them which are puffed up, but the power. 
What will ye? shall I come unto you with [ἐν] a rod, or in 


21 in word, but in power. 
love, and in the spirit of meekness ?? 


But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will, and will know, not the 


For the kingdom of God ts not 


1 Ver. 21.—The Rec. has πραότητος [with D. F. L. Cod. Sin.]; but Tisch. [according to A. B. C., © 2] reads πραὔτητος [80 


Words., Alf., Stanley]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 18. He here obviates an inference which 
might be drawn [and, it would seem from the 
Apostle’s language, had actually been drawn], 
from his sending Timothy to Corinth. It was, 
that he was not coming there himself. And 
some were elated, in consequence, with the idea, 
that it was because he dared not come.—Some 
have been puffed up.—By ἐφυσιώϑησαν, 
puffed up, we are not to understand that conceit 
of wisdom, spoken of before, which lifted certain 
of them high in their own esteem, above the sim- 
plicity of the Apostle. He alludes rather to that 
arrogant manner, that overweening insolence, 
which is a common feature of party spirit. 
Whether any declarations of theirs, respecting 
his not coming to Corinth, had been communi- 
eated to Paul; or whether he only inferred from 
their conduct that they must be indulging in such 
expectations; or whether he only intended to say 
that they were puffed up, as though he were not 
to be present among them again, may be left un- 
decided. Bengel’s idea, ‘that a Divine inspiration 
discovered to him the thoughts which would 
arise in their minds on reading his letter,’ is 
ingenious, but hardly suitable.—as though I 
also were not coming.—dc μὴ ἐρχομένου 
δέ wov.—The dé relates to the sending of Tim- 
othy, and puts μου in conjunction with him. 
[““ὡς expresses the assumption in their minds: 
the present participle ἐρχομένου refers to their 


saying—ove ἐρχεται: ‘he its not coming.’ 
And, inasmuch as ac—épy. forms one idea, the δέ 
is placed after it all. See Harr. Partikellehre 1, 
p. 190.” Axr.]. 

Ver. 19. Counter-statements.—But I will 
come to you shortly.—Paul’s courage here 
speaks out resolutely in an emphatic, “7 will 
come’ (éAevoouar), which is put first. The ‘short- 
ly’ (comp. xvi. 6), [but why not also the entire 
fact of his coming also?], he makes dependent 
on the will of the Lord (xvi. 7), whose servant 
he is, and who might appoint him tasks, the dis- 
charge of which would prevent him from exe- 
cuting his purpose.—if the Lord will.—Thus 
courage and assurance are coupled with a hum- 
ble consciousness of dependence, and with sub- 
mission to the control of a higher power. [‘*So 
constantly did Paul live in communion with 
Christ as his God, submitting to Him and trust- 
ing to Him at all times.” Hoper].—and I will 
know, yvéc0nat.—This denotes, not a judi- 
cial finding upon a previous trial, nor yet 8 
simple taking knowledge of by observation 
(Meyer), but a consciousness attained by expe- 
rience, and by tests applied. It implies that 
Apostolic discernment, which penetrates through 
all outward shows into the very essence of 
things, which does not suffer itself to be deceived 
by lofty phrase, or high sounding threats (i. 17; 
iii. 4), but which accurately detects the presence 
or absence of a true capacity for energetic and 
successful labors in the kingdom of God (comp. 
ver. 20).—not the speech of them that are 


CHAP. IV. 18-21. 


105 


ra Pe 


puffed up, but the power.—There is the 
same contrast between λόγος and δύναμις here, that 
we have 1 Thess. i. 5; comp. 2 Tim. iii. 5, 
where instead of ‘‘speech” we have ‘‘the form of 
godliness”’ contrasted with ‘‘power.” “Δύναμις 
is the essential power, or true nature and effi- 
cacy of a thing in opposition to mere external 
show.” NeanpER. To explain it of the power to 
work miracles [Chrys., Grotius], or of moral 
virtue [Theod., Pelagius], or of the influences of 
doctrine upon life [Calvin], would not suit the 
context. [‘‘It is power to work for the further- 
ance of God’s kingdom—a power conditioned on 
the possession of true inward spiritual energy 
(which de Wette makes it to mean). Examples 
of this are seen in Paul himself, in Luther and 
in others.” Murer. It was such power as the 
Apostles were commanded to wait for at Jerusa- 
lem, ere they went forth to be witnesses for their 
Lord, and which was exhibited so wonderfully 
at the day of Pentecost; such power as Paul 
speaks of, when to the Thessalonians he said: 
‘Our Gospel came not unto you, in word only, 
but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost’ (where 
we see that the antithesis in the text is not to be 
taken absolutely but relatively); such power as 
is mentioned in Rom. xy. 18, ‘‘the Gentiles being 
made obedient by word and deed, through mighty 
signs and wonders, by the power of the Holy 
Ghost.” It was an essential attribute of the 
Church, and especially of the ministry of the 
Church, as energized for the conquest of the 
world by the indwelling spirit of God, and so 
made mighty to the pulling down of strongholds. 
The lack of power, therefore, indicated an ab- 
sence of the spirit, the want of a Divine commis- 
sion and of a heavenly unction]. 

Ver. 20. Reason for the foregoing. The eye 
of an Apostle must be directed to the kingdom of 
God, and to whatever promotes its advancement. 
And this kingdom is not built up by beautiful 
and high-sounding speeches, but by that spiri- 
tual energy which awakens and develops the 
inward life of the spirit.—For the kingdom 
of God.—By this is meant the Divine kingdom 
of the Messiah as a life in communion with God, 
or as a social state pervaded and regulated by 
the Divine will. It must, therefore, bear upon 
itself the signature of righteousness, holiness 
and blessedness. Or, as the Old Testament des- 
cribes it (e. g. Ps. 72), it is a ‘kingdom of right- 
eousness and peace; in which character it is 
spoken of again in Rom. xiv. 17. This is also 
the ruling idea in historical Christianity, whose 

‘primitive form is the Church. Its full realiza- 
tion, however, where the living law penetrates 
and pervades all that is phenomenal, or, in other 
words, where the archetypal idea and the fact 
wholly correspond, belongs to the future age. 
To exclude the ethical element from the concep- 
tion, is just as incorrect as to hold by it alto- 
gether. In the New Testament both are united, 
prominence being given, sometimes to one, and 
sometimes to the other, in different passages. 
But that only the truly pious and believing can 
properly be members of this kingdom (Col. iii. 
8; Phil. iv. 21; Eph. v. 5), is seen in the fact, 
that it is a fellowship in holiness. [For a good 
exposition of this important term, see Farr- 
BAIRN’s Herm. Man. p. 56. OusH. Com. Matt. 





wt. 21].—is, éoriv—is to be understood and 
associated with ἐν, im, and is to be taken as in 
ii. 5, to mean, consists in, stands in.—not in 
word, but in power.—From this it is evident 
that the ethical element of God’s kingdom is 
mainly considered. But whether the Apostle is 
here speaking of the ground or condition upon 
which a person participates in this kingdom, or 
of its direct active advancement, may be questioned. 
In the former case the sense would be: that, 
whereon participation in God’s kingdom is con- 
ditioned, viz., faith and love, is not brought 
about through word, but through the power that 
is at work in its behalf, 7. e. of the minister or 
teacher (Meyer); in the latter case it would 
mean: he only is able truly to advance God’s 
kingdom, in whom this power exists. The latter 
interpretation, which includes also the idea, that 
such a person alone can be regarded as rightly 
belong'ng to God’s kingdom, is simpler and 
more suited to the context. ‘It must be said, 
however, that the distinction here made between 
word and power, is not for the purpose of sepa- 
rating the latter from the former, and attributing 
to it an operation that manifests itself apart from 
and independent of the word, as fanatics teach; 
but in order to contrast with the empty declama- 
tion of false teachers that true preaching which 
is filled with the spirit,—to oppose to their mere 
artificial rhetoric the power of God which resides 
in the simplicity of the Gospel.” Burazr. 

Ver. 21. Having expressed his determination 
to go to Corinth, he here leaves it for them to 
decide in what form his authority shall be exer- 
cised (2 Cor. x. 6; xiii. 2 ff). This verse some 
commentators [Calvin, Beza, Lachmann, Stanley 
Words.,] connect with the following chapter as 
opening a new topic for rebuke. But, as no al- 
lusion is there made to his coming to Corinth, 
and there is no particle to connect it with what 
follows, it is better to take it as concluding this 
chapter. [So Meyer, Alf., Hodge].—What— 
τίΞ:-- πότερον, but is more forcible, inasmuch ag 
the alternative presented does not appear at once. 
—will ye ?—[‘‘As Chrys. strikingly says, ‘The 
whole thing lies with you.’”” Mreyer].—ShallI 
come.—The verb ἔλθω is not dependent on 
ϑέλετε---ἰὸ you with a rod, ἐν pa3dw—[The 
use of év to express the relation of accompani- 
ment or instrumentality, is not a Hebraism, but 
a genuine Geek idiom. So Meyer. But Winer, 
2 xlviii. d. says, it is also used like the Hebrew 


Ὁ in cases where Greek authors employ the Da- 


tive alone. Its significance in the text is well 
given by Aur. ‘“‘not only with a rod, but in such 
purpose as to use it. The preposition here gives 
the idea of the element in which, much as ἐν 
δόξῃ. Here also he presents to view his pa- 
ternal relation. The rod is the symbol of fatherly 
severity. [It means the rod of His mouth. For 
the word of God, spoken by such as Paul, was 
sharp and powerful. There is an intimation 
here of Paul’s consciousness of power]. In con- 
trast with this, and as the alternative before 
them, love is mentioned—or in love.—This in- 
deed is not excluded from severity; but it forms 
an antithesis to it, inasmuch as in severity the 
natural expression of love is kept in abeyance, 
and it is compelled to manifest itself in ways alien 


106 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


23595 0999 IHIIII I, 


to itself. This idea is more fully brought out in 
the associated clause—and (in) the spirit of 
meekness.—LuTuHER says: ‘‘ with tenderness 
of spirit,’ so that πνεῦμα would then mean the 
subjective disposition. But Meyer, following the 
analogy of such passages as John xy. 26; Rom. 
viii, 15; 2 Cor. iv. 18; Eph. i. 17; Rom, i. 4; 
[where, as here, πνεῦμα is followed by the ab- 
stract genitive and evidently denotes the Holy 
Spirit, whose specific working is expressed by 
the noun in connection], interprets the word here 
in like manner. [But, as Alf. shows, Meyer is 
mistaken when he affirms, that this meaning at- 
taches to πνεῦμα in all kindred passages of the 
New Testament. There is plainly no fixed 
usage compelling this interpretation here. It 
were better, therefore, with Calvin, de Wette, 
Stanley and others, to understand by the phrase: 
a meek, gentle spirit. See Winer ἢ xxxiv. 3 b]. 
. Πραύὕτης denotes sparing, forgiving mildness. In 
this winning way he gives them to understand 
that he would much rather be spared the neces- 
sity of discipline. [‘‘It is plain from this, as 
from numerous other passages, that the Apostles 
exercised the right of discipline over all the 
churches. They could receive into the commu- 
nion of the Church, or excommunicate from it at 
discretion. This prerogative was unseparable 
from their infallibility as the messengers of 
Christ, sent to establish and administer his 
kingdom.’”’ Hopcr. ‘For nerve and vigor, for 
dignity and composed confidence, this passage 
cannot be easily paralleled even in Demosthenes 
himself.” BLoomrieLp]. 


DOGMATICAL AND ETHICAL. 


The kingdom of God, a thing of power. This 
kingdom, formerly typified in shadowy outlines 
(σκιά) through the promise and the law, and 
through a series of special providences, and pre- 
pared through miracles and signs, and through 
the gracious, wise and holy guidance and train- 
ing of a chosen people, was first exhibited in its 
original principles, and perfectly realized as the 
kingdom of heaven upon earth, in the person of 
the Son of man, come from Heaven (comp. Luke 
ii. 14; Matth. xii. 28). He was the first to fulfil 
all righteousness, always doing that which was 
well pleasing to the Father (Jno. viii. 29; Matth. 
iii. 15). In the plenitude of the Spirit’s might, 
which rested on Him, (Jno. i. 82), He exercised 
a constraining and subduing power over the 
hearts of men, and in word and deed evinced a 
Divine puissance of love, that overcame the hos- 
tile spirits of darkness, proved invincible to Sa- 
tanic assaults, loosed all manner of bonds, and 
removed evil of every kind. Though externally 
weak and depressed, we find Him emerging vic- 
torious out of that judgment and death, to which 
He had freely subjected Himself, and, as the one 
to whom all power in Heaven and upon earth 
had been given, rising far above all creaturely 
ee into the right hand of the Majesty on 

igh. 

Having thus in His own person and history 
laid the foundations of the Kingdom of God, and 
illustrated its character and career and triumphs, 
we behold Him gathering a Church, through the 
dispensation of the Spirit, out of that apostate 


race, (whose nature He had assumed and had, 
essentially as well as morally, united to God), 
and exhibiting in it, as in a germ, the kingdom 
of righteousness and peace, in the exercise of ἃ 
lofty power over the hearts of men and in the 
manifestation of ability to redeem and save. 
This Church, which, from its unseen beginnings, 
has, after a lapse of ages, spread out into ἃ 
mighty tree, continues to exist now, precisely as 
it originated, only through the might of the Di- 
vine Spirit, who works in its members—espe- 
cially in those who are active in its cause—for 
the continued illumination and sanctification of 
mankind. And only by the same Divine agency 
is the kingdom of God, which is enclosed in the 
Church,, advanced, and that period hastened, 
when it shall be made manifest in all its glorious 
reality, and when the Lord shall reign King over 
all the nations. (Zach. xiv. 9). The powers 
which rule in the Church are, in fact, the powers 
of ‘the world to come,’ the αἰων μέλλων (Heb. vi. 
5); and while these powers display their Divine 
energy, in cleansing the heart more and more 
from the filthiness of the flesh and the spirit, in 
promoting knowledge and sanctification, and in 
strengthening the will to endure under all as- 
saults of temptation and persecution, the Church 
is ripening towards that glorious epoch when, in 
the union of all the holy in Heaven and upon 
earth, it will appear supreme in Christ, over all 
things, as the true Kingdom of God, wherein 
God shall be all in all (1 Cor. xv. 28). 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[1. The carnal-minded in the Church, 1, are 
apt to gather presumption, and take courage for 
self-display, during the absence of their Divinely 
appointed guides, ver. 18; 2, need to be tho- 
roughly tested as to their really spiritual quali- 
ties, and exposed, ver. 19; 8, are deserving of 
rebuke and discipline, ver. 21. 

2. Since the Kingdom of God is not in word, 
but in power, its ministers must be, 1, full of cou- 
rage and fearless of opposition, ver. 19; 2, de- 
pendent on the Lord, from whom their power 
comes, for direction in all their movements, 
ver. 19; 3, capable of testing human pretensions, 
ver. 19; 4, prepared for severe or lenient dealing, 
as circumstances may require, yet disposed in 
spirit to the latter, rather than the former, 
ver. 21. 

8. In the truth, that the kingdom of God is 
not in word, but in power—the power of the 
Holy Ghost, we have, 1, A lesson of instruction. 
It shows us to what source ministers and all 
Christian laborers are indebted for the success 
of their words and efforts; 2, A criterion for 
judgment. We can ascertain whether the king- 
dom of God is present in any person, or church, 
which claims to possess it, by the ability shown 
to achieve those results for which the Divine 
power is given; 8, A ground of encouragement. 
Weak as believers are in themselves, and great 
as is the work to be accomplished, the kingdom 
of God in them can strengthen them to do all 
things; 4, A lesson of duty. If we would do great 
things for God, we must trust, a. not to our own 
skill in persuasion, but ὁ. in the power which 
the Holy Ghost imparts; 6, A rebuke. Lack of 





CHAP. V. 1-5. 


1(n 





achievement for the kingdom οἵ God cannot be 
charged upon a lack of powerin it, but upon a 
lack of faith in Christians to use the power 
given]. 

Lutuer :—Ver. 20. Faith is a living, essential 
thing; it makes a man entirely new, changes his 
disposition, and turns him completely about. 
Wilt thou continue to remain in thy pride and 
immodesty, in avarice and anger, and wilt thou 
boast and prate much of faith? then comes Paul 
to thee and says, ‘Listen, good friend; the 
kingdom of God does not consist in words, but in 
power and in deeds.’ 

Srarke:—The point to be looked at is not how 
A person talks about religion, but whether the 
yssentials of Christianity—truth, experience, ac- 
tion—are in him (ver. 19). O, precious declara- 
tion! It is power—power—not prating and show 
that makes the Christian. — Herp. Where the 
kingdom of God is, there’ Christ is, and the Holy 
Spirit also, who regenerates men (ver. 20).—If 
soft words won’t serve, then the minister must 
rebuke sharply.—Love remains the same when it 
is severe, as when it is mild, provided it only 
leads to God. Its various arts of regulation 
must first be thoroughly learned and then prac- 
tised when needful.—Righteousness, holiness and 
love exist in God combined; and as both Law and 
Gospel have alike issued therefrom, so should 
every evangelical minister rightly employ both. 
2 Tim. ii. 15 (ver. 21), 











Bert. Brpste:—The whole kingdom of our 
God is pervaded with Divine and heavenly 
powers. And although indeed He utters words 
from thence, yet these words are spirit and life, 
yea, the words of eternal life (Jno. vi. 63, 68). 
Hence words, fraught with the spirit and quick- 
ening in their influence, are also a fruit of the 
kingdom of God, which consists in power. In 
short, every thing which God speaks, works and 
does, in and through his Son, carries in itself a 
kind of power, and manifests this power wherever 
it is not hindered (ii. 5; Rom. i. 16), (ver. 20). 
People say sometimes: ‘Where is love? More 
is accomplished by love than by severity.’ True, 
provided we are not compelled to use severity. 
Then severity itself is also an effect of love (ver.. 
21). 

ALI τἢ ‘puffed up” are mighty im 
words, but weak in deeds. Inward spiritual, 
power lies in humility. The Church of Christ. 
does not need braggarts, but true workers (ver.. 
19).—The unction of the true preacher is detected: 
in the power he exerts upon the hearts of men: 
(ver. 2U).—Man determines for himself the treat-- 
ment he shall receive, whether it shall be seve-- 
rity or mildness. Well for him, who is still en-. 
joying the gracious period of discipline. He- 
is better than one altogether reprobate. God has. 
a two fold staff, the staff of mildness and the stafi’ 
of woe (Zach. xi. 7-14) (ver. 2). 


X.—A SECOND INSTANCE OF DEFECTIVE CHRISTIAN SENTIMENT.—TOLERATION OF 
IMPURITY.—NEED OF CHURCH IN PURIFICATION. 


[A case of incest stated.—Call for Excommunication.—Its form and intent]. 


Cuarter V. 1-5. 


It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as: 
is not so much as named [is not even'] among the Gentiles, that one should have his 


bo 


father’s wife. 


And ye are puffed up, [7] and have not [did not] rather mourned, 


[mourn], that he that hath done? this deed might be taken away [om. away*] from among: 
you [7]. For I verily, as* absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already,. 
as though I were present, concernin [om. concerning] him that hath so done’ this deed,. 
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ [om. Christ®], when ye are gathered together, 
and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, [om. Christ®]. To deliver- 
su:h a one unt» Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in, 
the day of the Lord Jesus®. 


Om ὦν 


1 Ver. 1—The addition of ὀνομάζεται in the Rec. has the best authorities [A. B. C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.] against it, and is: 
perhaps a supplemeut according to Eph. v. 3. 

2 Ver. 2.—It is doubtful whether we ought to read ποήσας with Griesbach, Meyer [Alford, Words.], or πράξας with 
Riickert, Tischendorf. Both are equally suited to the sense. and are about equally supported. 

8 Ver. 2.—The Rec. εξαρθῇ is still less authorized than ὀνομάζεται ver. 1, and no doubt originated out of ver. 13. 

4 Ver. 3.—The Rec. ws, ws, before ἀπών, absent, has indeed the oldest MSS. [{A. B. C. D.1 Cod. Sin.] against it, and hence 
is rejected by Lachmann, Meyer [Alf. Words.]. But there are also many and good authorities in its favor. [D.* F. L. Syr. 
and many of the Greek Fathers]. And it might as easily have been omitted for the sake of avoiding the repetition (παρών), 
or, as not suited to ἀπών, as admarginated, and then afterwards inserted according to the analogy of ὡς παρών. We retain 
it with Tischendorf. [{We, on the contrary, omit it as badly supported and wholly needless, and wait for Tischendorf’s last 
Ed. See comments below.} 


§ Ver. 4.—The χριστοῦ of the Rec. was probably added later, because of the solemnity of the title. [It is found in DS. 
F. L. Ged. Sin. omitted in A. B. D1.] ᾿ : Ἂν ere 


© Ver. 5.—This reading (Rec. ) is the most probable. Both the omission of Ἰησοῦ (Tisch.) as well as the addition ἡμῶν 
after κυρίο, and ο χριστοῦ after ᾿Ιησοῦ are not sufficiently accredited. 


108 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Paul here turns to a second topic for animad- 
version, and what follows might well serve to 
take down still further the self-conceit of the 
Corinthians. [‘* This, practically speaking, forms 
the crisis of the whole Epistle. It is, as it were, 
the burst of the storm, the mutterings of which, 
as Chrysostom obseryes, had already been heard 
in the earlier chapters, and of which the echoes 
are still discernible, not only in this Epistle, but 
also in the second Epistle, the first half of which 
is nothing less than an endeavor to allay the ex- 
citement and confusion created by this severe 
remonstrance.” SrannEY]. The passage is in- 
troduced abruptly without any conjunctive par- 
ticle. 

Ver. 1. States the specific ground of complaint. 
—Commonly ὅλως: not indeed, nor, at all, as it 
can mean only in negative clauses; [nor ‘ abso- 
lutely, as simply adding force to the assertion.” 
STANLEY; nor, in short (Clericus), which Ols. says 
is the only second meaning that can be justified ] ; 
‘but, as in chap. vi. 7; xv. 29: Matth. νυ. 34, in 
general, It belongs not to top veia, fornication, 
but as an adverb to ακούεται, is heard, and so 
to the whole clause. [‘‘It implies, however, the 
general prevalence of the practice spoken of.” 
OtsHAuseN. So Meyer, de Wette; and Hodge 
allows it. ‘‘ The signification, certainly, impkying 
that the matter was no doubtful rumor, but an 
evident fact (as Calvin, Beza and others), is con- 
trary to the meaning of the word.” Mryer]— 
there is heard among you, ακοῤεται ἐν 
t ziv.—By this it is not simply meant, that there 
was some talk of the subject mentioned in their 
circles generally, but that the thing, of which 
the talk was, prevailed there; although this is 
only to be inferred from the context, and is not 
directly expressed. (It would then mean: ἐν ὑμῖν 
οὖσα, or εἶναι; the former, in case it was a correct 
report; the latter, if it were only a vague rumor). 
{The names of the informants are not specified, 
as in the former instance. It was a case of 
public rumor, and the sin so notorious as to 
need no vouchers. See Words. ].—fornication, 
mopveta—t**The word is used in a compre- 
hensive sense, including all violations of the 
seventh commandment.”” Honan]. Of these one 
in particular was singled out, of the grossest and 
most astounding sort, viz., of incest. This is in- 
troduced by καί, which points to something spe- 
cial under a general head, and brings it in as a 
climax,—and indeed, or yea even,—with the 
repetition of the general term for the sake of 
emphasis,—such fornification, as not even 
among the Gentiles.—The ell psis might be 
filled up most readily by: ‘is heard,’ or simply 
by: ‘is.’ [The Rec. text has ‘is named,’ which 
Alf. calls ‘*a clumsy gloss taken from Eph. v. 8. 
Paul here sets forth the unparalleled nature of 
the crime he was about to speak of, and the 
greatness of the disgrace which thereby fell 
upon the Christian Churech—‘a holy people.’— 
That one has his father's wife, i. ¢., his 
step-mother (urpv1d)—comp. Levit. xviii. 7, 8— 
and this either as wife, or concubine. The word 
ἔχειν, to have, is used of both relations, as is seen 
by such passages as vii. 2, 29; Matth. xiv. 4: 





xxii. 28; Jno. iv. 18. In this case it most pro- 
bably stands for an illegitimate concubinal rela- 
tion (comp. Osiander), which was also a ‘having,’ 
inasmuch as it was a habitual thing, as well as 
an act consummated (πράξας: having done, 
ver. 2; and κατεργασάμενος: having perpetrated, 
ver. 3).* By the expression—‘ his father’s wife,’ 
the wicked violation of the relation sustained to 
the father, is brought out more conspiculously 
than if he said simply ‘step-mother.’ The father, 
moreover, is to be considered as still living, 
(against Besser), and as a Christian. See 2 Cor. 
vii. 12, where the father is spoken of as one 
‘that had suffered wrong’ (ἀδικηϑείς), and where 
Paul says ‘he did not write on his account.’ The 
son, at all events, must have been a member of 
the church; the woman, however, not, since he, 
and not she, is made the subject of censure. 
Further questions, 6. g., as to whether the man 
was a proselyte, and had proceeded on the Jewish 
maxim, that a person who had become ‘fa new 
creature,” had severed himself from all former 
connections, and was at liberty to enter into new 
relations otherwise forbidden? may be suffered 
to rest. In speaking of the crime here men- 
tioned as something not existing among the 
Gentiles, Paul does not mean to say that it never 
occurred in their history. Cases of this sort 
are indeed recorded, and tragedies have been 
founded upon them; but they are always 
spoken of as rare exceptions, that excited the 
utmost public horror. Cicero pro Cluentio: 
‘“‘Scelus incredibile, et preter hake unam in omni 
vita inauditum.” (comp. Wetstein and others on 
this passage). 

Ver. 2. Expressions of astonishment at their 
conduct in view of the above fact.—And ye 
are puffed up ?—[ This and the following clause 
should be read as questions. So Calvin, Meyer, 
Alf., Words., et al.]. The ὑμεῖς, ye is emphatic, 
and points back to ἐν ὑμῖν, among you, φ. d. 
‘such a thing has occurred among you, and you 
are, οἶς. Questions of this sort are often intro- 
duced by καί, and, which here does not take the 
emphasis as though equivalent to: ‘and yet,’ but 
throws it forward on the word following. The 
assertion that they were puffed up, refers, not 
to iv. 18, where this is affirmed only of some, but 
to iv. 8, where he describes the whole Church 
as filled with the conceit of their spiritual per- 
fection. A great mistake it would be to suppose 
(with Chrys., Theod., Grot.) that the incestuous 
person himself was the subject of their pride, on 
the ground that he was some distinguished 
teacher among them; or that Paul here alludes 
to the boasting of other parties over that to 
which the incestuous belonged. —The proper 
state of feeling which they ought to have mani-~ 
fested, is expressed in the negative question.— 
And did not—when ye first knew of the crime— 
rather mourn--i.c. mourn, that amember of their 





* [Tt is not credible that the Corinthian congregation 
would have endured that one of their body should live with 
a harlot, especially his mother-in-law. But because this 
illicit connection had been palliated by the name of matri- 
mony, therefore they might connive at it, especially if there 
were any who were the man’s zealous friends, and endea- 
vored to soften the baseness of the thing.” Cretiurus. And 
this is the view of Meyer, whose arguments Kling does not 
seem to have thought it worth while to refute, and whick 
undoubtedly ought to be admitted). 


CHAP. V. 1-5. 


109 


i Ἑ ἝῬ“ἙἙ͵ἙἙ.͵ἘἘῬ“ τ Π“ΠΠΠπτΠΤ'Λ'γ'͵τοπτιξι; 0|-.:τ.-.ς--- ὃ. τ οα--’------ςΟ-ς-ς-ς-ςς-ςςς-ς.-ς-ς--τς------ς 


body had sunk so low, and the Church of the 
Lord, which ought to have been kept holy, had 
been thus defiled and dishonored. (The Aorist 
ἐπενϑήσατε indicates the act, expressed by the 
present, as past and finished, as in ἐπιστεύσατε 
iii. 5). This mourning, which has its source in 
a lively sense of the cammon interest which all 
have in what affects all, implied also a combined 
and energetic movement for the removal of the 
evil deplored,—in order that he who had 
done this deed might be removed from 
among you? ἕνα ap%7.—The iva here is not 
ecbatic, but retains its proper telic force, ‘‘ wnto 
the end that he,” ete. The removal pointed to, 
must not be regarded as implying any Divine 
visitation, a cutting off by death for example, or 
the like; since it is clear from ver. 13, that he 
only contemplated the excommunication of the 
guilty party by an act of the Church itself—an 
act to which their sorrow should have prompted 
them. Brnaet says: ‘‘ Ye had no sorrow to stir 
you up for the removal,” etc. The manner in 
which the party under censure is designated, 
carries force: ‘‘he that hath done this deed’? — 
ἔργον, facinus, this wicked deed. 

Vers. 3-5. That such sorrow, leading to such 
results, should have prevailed in the Church, he 
confirms by stating the decision, which he, on his 
part, had reached in the case. [‘‘ There is some- 
thing in the involved structure of this sentence, 
which gives a strong impression of the emotion, 
anguish, and indignation with which it was writ- 
ten, and which vented itself in broken and dis- 
turbed periods, as it were per singultus.”— 
Worps].—For I, for my part, ἐγὼ pév.— 
The μὲν puts Paul in strong contrast with the 
Corinthians, who were so indifferent and remiss 
in the case. If we are to retain ὡς, as, it must 
be regarded as embracing in its force the two fol- 
lowing participles, and belonging especially to 
the latter, ‘though absent in body, yet as present 
in spirit.’ This then reappears in the next clause 
without any qualifying term, and as carrying 
the emphasis: κέκρικα ὡς παρών. The same con- 
trast occurs in Col. ii. 5: “ For though I am ab- 
sent from you in the flesh, yet in spirit I am 
present with you.” [Meyer, Words., Alf. omit 
the ὡς, as unauthorized. The sense is clearer 
without it—‘for I being absent in body, yet 
present in spirit.’ The participles state the facts 
in the case, and require no as implying simili- 
tude. This appears only in the next clause, 
where it properly belongs]|.—Absent in body, 
yet present in the spirit.—By ‘in the spirit’ 
we are not to understand the Holy Ghost (as 
Chrys. and others), but his own spirit, as con- 
trasted with his body. Yet the spirit of the Apos- 
tle must not be thought of apart from the Divine 
illumination and energy which he enjoyed, and 
by means of which, even in his absence, he 
looked into and influenced the state of the Corin- 
thian Church; although the τὸ πνεῦμα, the spirit 
designates even his spiritual nature in contrast 
with his physical. A similar case occurs in 2 
Kings v. 26, where Elisha says to Gehazi: ‘‘ Went 
not my spirit with thee?”—have already 
judged, 707 «éxptxa.—(comp. onii. 2). ‘Al- 
ready,’’—this energetic and prompt conduct on 











among whom the shameful scandal had occurred, 
—as present,—|[ Not, in spirit, for he was there 
already in spirit, but in body; ‘as though he 
were visibly among them to control and direct 
in the matter.’ So Meyer, Alf., Hodge]. 

[As the words which follow are brought under 
discussion as to their grammatical construction, 
it seems best, for the sake of perspicuity, to give 
them in full and translate them as they stand:— 
τὸν ὅυτω τοῦτο κατεργασάμενον ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι TOD 
κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοὺ συναχϑέντων ὑμῶν καὶ τοῦ 
ἐμοῦ πνεύματος σὺν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν 
Ἰησοῦ παραδοῦναι τὸν τοιοῦτον τῷ catava. lit,—him 
so having perpetrated this thing, in the 
name of our Lord Jesus being gathered 
together, you and my spirit, with the 
power of our Lord Jesus, to give such 
a one to Satan.—The first question is as to 
the proper connection of the first clause here: 
‘shim having perpetrated this thing.” In the 
E. V. this is taken as governed by some preposi- 
tion understood, 6. g., κατα, concerning—so Words. 
Others (Stanley) construe it as the direct object 
of the verb κέκρικα, judge]. In this case the 
sentence would read: ‘I have judged or passed 
sentence on him who has,’ etc. The best way, 
however, would be to regard it as the object of 
παραδοῦναι in ver. 5, so that the τὸν τοιοῦτον, such 
a one, would then be merely the resumption of 
the same object under another form. [We should 
then translate, putting a colon after κέκρικα, ‘I 
have judged, that the person who has perpetrated 
this thing, ye in the name of the Lord Jesus, etc., 
do deliver such a one,’ etc.]. The reason for 
putting this objective clause first is to give it the 
emphasis, as bringing the guilty party more pro- 
minently in front. And the word ‘so’ is in- 
serted for the sake of intensifying the enormity 
of the guilt incurred; and it points to certain 
aggravating circumstances well known to his 
readers,—‘‘So shamefully, while called a bro- 
ther.’—Brnget. We might also (with Osiander) 
here take in view both, the man’s shamlessness 
in perpetrating his crime and his utter disregard 
of his Christian obligations. The next question 
is about the proper connection of the subordinate 
clauses. These may be combined in four differ- 
ent ways. Hither they may all be united with 
the principal verb παραδοῦναι, to deliver [Mosheim, 
Schrader and others], to which Bengel and others 
also join ὡς παρών, as present; or with the parti- 
cipial clause συναχϑέντων, being assembled [Chrys., 
Theoph, Calvin]; or they may be connected 
partly with this and partly with the other, so 
that either ἐν τῷ ὀνόμ, in the name, etc., shall be 
joined to συναχϑέντων, being assembled, and σὺν τῇ 
δυνάμει, with the power, to παραδοῦναι, to deliver 
[so Beza, Calov., Billr., Olsh.]; or precisely the 
reverse [Luther, Bengel, de Wette, Meyer, Alf., 
Hodge]. The last method seems the most suita- 
ble, viz: to unite the clause, ‘‘in the name of our 
Lord Jesus Christ”? (which stands first by way 
of emphasis, and which otherwise the analogy 
of Matth. xviii. 20 would lead us to join with the 
participle, ‘being assembled’) with the main 
verb, as expressing the ground of the chief tran- 
saction, so that the act spoken of shall appear to 
rest on Jesus, the acknowledged Head of the 


the part of an absent person forms a contrast all | Church, and upon His authority, and so pass for 
the more striking with the slackness of those! Hisact. (Com. 2 Thess, iii. 6; Acts iii. 6-16; and 


110 


aes 


respecting the word ‘name,’ chap. i. 2). ΑΒ for 
the clause, ‘‘ with the power of the Lord Jesus,” 
the very position of it makes it probable that 
this is to be connected with the participle, ‘being 
assembled’ and its adjuncts, since otherwise this 
participle would, in a most remarkable manner, 
be made to separate the more strictly qualifying 
terms of the main sentence. Besides it must be 
said that the phrase, ‘tin the name of our Lord 
Jesus,” better serves to qualify the act of ‘de- 
livering over to Satan,’ and includes also the 
force of the other phrase, ‘‘ with the power of our 
Lord,” letting alone the fact, that in this way 
we avoid the accumulation of qualifying terms 
for the main verb (as well as for the participial 
clause, if both should be joined to this). Never- 
theless, it is not to be overlooked that the phrase, 
‘‘with the power of our Lord,” also serves to 
qualify the act of ‘delivering over;” yet not 
directly, but only as a component part of the 
clause where it occurs. The entire parenthesis 
will then mean, that the whole case should be 
decided in an assembly of the Church,* where 
he would also be present in spirit ;+ and that in 
this gathering they would, moreover, be accom- 
panied by the power of the Lord Jesus for their 
assistance, (Luv, with, designates association, 
where, however, the co-worker is not a simple 
instrumentality in the hand of the other; and 
δύναμις, power, denotes not merely: ‘disposing in- 
Jluence,’ as Meyer supposes, but: force, might, ca- 


pability).t 





Γ “The feeling of absolute control in the matter, which 
finds expression in ver. 3, the Apostle softens first by the 
use of ‘in the name of our Lord Jesus,’ and then by associa- 
ting with himself, in the republican spirit of primitive Chris- 
tianity, the whole Church, where he presides in spirit.”— 
DE WETTE. | 


{7 “The Apostle translates himself in spirit to the Church 
in Corinth. and expresses his decision as if in midst of 
them.”—BeErRGER. ] 


[{ Meyer, de Wette and Alford agree in taking the words, 
“with the power of our Lord Jesus,” not as a third element 
in the proposed assembly, nor yet as something resident in 
the whole Church, butas belonging exclusively to Paul, and 
80 connect it directly to “ my spirit.” But this seems arbi- 
trary. If the act of ‘delivering over’ was to be the act of 
the whole Church and not one of independent apostolic au- 
thority, we must suppose that it, too, was fully empowered 
for the purpose by the Lord who had promised to be in it, 
when assembled in His name, to the end of time, giving 
force to its decisions. The grammatical question here will 
be apt to be determined very much in accordance with the 
preconceived theories of church government entertained by 
the interpreter. Hodge (e.g.) regards the Church as con- 
vened not for the purpose of voting and acting in the pre- 
mises, but “as mere spectators,” to impart “solemnity to 
the judicial proceeding.” So he takes the words in question 
as connected directly either with ‘my spirit,’ or with ‘to 
deliver *—the sense in either case being substantially the 
same. Wordsworth goes still farther, and regards the ex- 
communication as not only “promulgated in the presence 
of the Church,” but also as having “been done without ta- 
king council with them,’ and “ probably against their in- 
clination.” And so the Rheims version:—‘ Though the act 
was done in the face of the Church, yet the judgment and 
authority of giving sentence was in himself and not in the 
whole multitude, as the Protestant and pcpular sectaries 
affirm.” Owen,on the other hand, analyses the matter 
thus:—l. The supreme efficient cause of the excision is the 
power and authority of Jesus Christ. 2. The declarative 
cause of the equity of this sentence, the spirit of the Apostle. 
3. The instrumental, ministerial cause, the Church. ‘They 
were to “do it in the name of the Lord,” and thereby “ purge 
out the old leaven;’’? whence the punishment is said in 2 
Cor. ii. 6 to be “inflicted by many.” (See a full discussion 
of this in Owen’s Works, vol. xvi. p. 100). And Ne&anpER 
forcibly observes: ‘The Epistles of Paul, which treat of 
various controverted ecclesiastical matters, are addressed to 
whole churches, and he assumes that the decision belonged to 











THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





But what are we to understand by ‘the deliver. 
ing of sucha one to Satan?’ That by this phrase 
excommunication is intended, is evident from 
ver, 2 (‘‘that he might be taken away from 
among you.”) and from ver. 13 (‘* Wherefore put — 
away, efc.). But that this is all the expression 
involves, is improbable from the fact that it is 
not elsewhere used in this sense. We meet it 
again only in 1 Tim. i. 20, where it appears, as 
here, to imply something more. Rather it would 
seem to convey the additional thought that those, 
who were ejected from the Church of God—a 
realm which, as such, is exempt from the domi- 
nion of Satan,—were given over again into Sa- 
tan’s power, and unto his destructive influences; 
and that hence a certain control over these per- 
sons is granted him, viz., in so far as it may 
please the Lord, who ordains this lot for them 
through His Church and through the Apostolic 
office (Meyer). [But the question is, whether 
this was a miraculous subjection to the power of 
Satan, such as involved special evils and could 
be effected only by Apostolic authority, and so 
was peculiar to that age alone; or, whether it had 
regard to Satan only as the common source of the 
manifold miseries by which men are scourged, 
and as the unwilling instrument of a Divine dis- 
cipline over God’s children universally, and 
hence was something possible for all time, and 
takes place whenever a man is given over to suf- 
fer the bitter consequences of his vices, un- 
cheered by the grace of God’s kingdom? The 
former is the view which has prevailed in the 
Romish Church from the earliest times, and it 
was much used to enhance the terrors of priestly 
excommunication and justify the deliverance of 
ecclesiastical offenders into the hands of secular 
authorities for punishment. It is still advocated 
by many Protestant commentators, among whom 
are Meyer, Alford, Barnes, Hodge. The latter 
thus sums up the reasons in its support: 1. ‘It is 
clearly revealed in Scripture that bodily evils 
are often inflicted by the agency of Satan. 2. 
The Apostles were invested with the power of 
miraculously inflicting such evils, Acts vy. 1-11; 
xiii. 9-11; 2 Cor. x. 8; xiii. 10: 8. ni Timo 
20 the same formula occurs probably in the same 
sense. 4. There is no evidence that the Jews of 
that age ever expressed excommunication by 
this phrase, and therefore it would not, in all 
probability, be understood by Paul’s readers in 
that sense. 5. Excommunication would not have 
the effect of destroying the flesh, in the sense in 
which that expression is used in the following 
clause.’’ The consequence of this view is to ex- 
hibit the act under consideration as one done 
solely by Apostolic authority and power, and 
therefore as an exceptional case of discipline, 





the whole body. Wad it been otherwise he would have ad- 
dressed his instructions principally at least to the overseers. 
When a licentious member of the Church at Corinth was to 
be excommunicated the Apostle considered it a measure 
that ought to proceed from the whole society, and placed 
himself therefore in spirit among them, to unite with them 
in passing judgment.” Furthermore it might be asked, if 
the Church had no power to act in the premises, where was 
the ground for Panl to complain of their conduct, in nov 
securing the expulsion of the guilty parties? Plainly his 
purpose here, in decreeing as he did, was to supplement 
their lack of duty; and we are not to construe his proce ture 
as pro forma, but as extraordinary, and based upon that 
plenitude of power which he had as an Apostle.) 


« 


CHAP. V. 1-5. 


ΤΣ 


ee ee “ἕ“ἕἕ-.--- “-Ἑ-Ξ-Ἐς.ς, 


which can afford no precedent for after times. 
The opposite view is the one maintained by Cal- 
vin, Beza, Turretin, Owen, Poole, and many 
others. They regard the formula, ‘to deliver a 
person to Satan,’ only as a more solemn mode of 
stating the fact of excommunication as expressed 
by our Lord in Matth. xviii. 17,—one designed 
to exhibit more vividly the sad condition of him 
who has been cast out from the kingdom of God 
and so consigned into the hands of his great 
enemy, uncheered by the light and comforts of 
the Saviour. This seems the more rational in- 
terpretation, only that it does not take sufficient 
account of the malign agency ascribed to Satan 
in the Scriptures. For, 1, it accords precisely 
with the view of the Apostle, that outside the 
kingdom of God, Satan reigned as ‘the prince 
of the power of the air”’—as the one that “had 
the power of death’”’—as the one who was the 
source of bo lily inflictions, and had sent ‘a mes- 
senger to buffet him,’—even as he had “bound 
the woman who had the spirit of infirmity,” 
whom our Lord cured—and so was ever working 
in various ways to afflict mankind. And surely 
there is nothing in Scripture to warrant our be- 
lieving that his agency in this respect has been 
restrained as yet. His power to tempt to sin 
implies a power also to inflict the evils which sin 
engenders. 2. The power of Satan, we are also 
taught, is subordinate to the power of God. He 
may be suffered to work an utter destruction, or 
be used as the unwilling instrument of a Divine 
discipline. Job and Paul are illustrations of the 
latter case. And we have every reason to be- 
lieve, that Satan is still employed in God’s hands 
for this very work of discipline or destruction. 
Now if this be true, there is nothing miraculous 
or extraordinary in the case under review, even 
though we may suppose that physical evils are 
understood. The instances of Annanias and 
Sapphira, and of Elymas the sorcerer are not 
parallel with it. It is no objection that this 
formula of excommunication has never been 
found to have been used by the Jews, for it is in 
keeping with the whole tenor of Paul’s doctrine. 
Moreover, the results anticipated would be di- 
rectly conducive to the end proposed, if, as was 
hoped for, the culprit was no reprobate, but one 
who promised recovery under this most humbling 
and chastening discipline}.—The end to be 
subserved by this ‘deliverance unto Satan’ was, 
—for the destruction of the flesh—sic 6i¢- 
ϑρον τῆς capKdc.—That by this no mere moral 
effect is indicated, such as the mortification of 
the selfish and sensuous propensities of our na- 
ture, is evident both from the connection with 
what precedes, which points to an operation of 
Satan, and from the use of the word ὄλεϑρος. 
which nowhere occurs in the above sense (for 
which rather the terms ϑανατοῦν., vexpovv, orav- 
ροῦν, and the like, are used), and from the an- 
tithesis made here between ‘‘flesh”’ and ‘spi- 
rit.” Zaps here denotes the physical life in its 
depraved state, as an organism where sin is 
seated, and which serves sin. Now this, which 
had been used in so shameless a manner by the 
incestuous person as the instrument of sin, 
Paul wishes to have given over as a prey to Sa- 
tan, that he might execute upon it a correspond- 
ing disorder, and so fulfil the Divine judgment. 








[And it must be added that there is no vice so 
fearfully avenged in that which is its seat and 
source, as this very one under consideration. Its 
legitimate consequences, so terrible as to carry 
in them the aspect of Satanic malignity, are, in 
fact, a ‘destruction of the flesh’].—But the ruin, 
thus to be wrought in the outer man, was not to 
be an utter and final one. There was in it a 
merciful design,—that the spirit may be 
saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.—The 
idea is, that through the penalties inflicted upon 
his body the offender might be brought to re- 
pentance, so that although the former might per- 
ish, yet his spirit—the centre of his personality— 
being still receptive of Divine impressions, might 
be snatched from destruction, and be found at 
last within the circle of the ransomed at the day 
of final separation and decision. That the 
Apostle here contemplated something more than 
a bare possibility, is apparent from the whole 
tenor of this passage; and he might express 
such hope without presupposing any irresistible 
operation of Divine grace.* [On the general 
subject of Satan—the nature and extent of his 
agency, and his relation to the kingdom of God, 
see the able articles in Krrro’s Hnc., 2d ed.; 
SmrruH’s Bib. Dict., under the word ‘Satan,’ and 
the one in Herrzoa’s Re. Ency. Teufel; also an 
article by Moses Stuart in the Bib. Sac. for 
1843, p. 117]. 


DOGMATICAL AND ETHICAL. 


Excommunication: its right, occasions, grounds, 
form, intent and results. 1. The right to excom- 
municate is both a natural and a delegated right. 
The right of any community to exist, involves 
also the right to eject from itself all elements 
that are inconsistent with its character and in- 
tegrity and well being. This belongs, therefore, 
to the Church. But above and beyond this, the 
injunction of Christ (Matth. xviii. 17), and the 
example of the Apostles make it an imperative 
duty, for the preservation of the Church as a 
holy body, béaring witness for God and truth 
and righteousness. 2. The occasion which calls 
for the act must be some flagrant and habitual 
offence. Spiritual perfection is not to he looked 
for in the Church. ‘The tares, which in outward 
appearance resemble the wheat, must be allowed 
to remain to the end. Hence many faults in 
doctrine and practice in the Church at Corinth, 
Paul was content with rebuking. But the inces- 
tuous person was to be cast out. In this for- 
bearance of his towards the one, and severity 
towards the other, an example is set for all time. 
To distinguish when the one should end and the 
other should begin, belongs to the gift of wise 
government. 3. Its grounds]. The soul of a.true 
evangelical discipline is Christ, His name and 
power—Christ dwelling in the hearts of believers 
by faith, and especially present with those whom 
he has made shepherds in it, with His living, 
powerful, all-enlightening, penetrating, sifting 
and dividing word, and hence with the energy of 
His Spirit operating therein. It is in the light 
of this word, that sin must be recognized as a 





[* Kling’s refutation of Riickert’s charge of “hasty and 
indiscreet zeal” on the part of Paul we venture to omit as 
unnecessary. No one in this country would think of enter- 
taining it for a moment]. 


112 





reproach and a desecration of His name, and 
therefore as something which evokes a reaction 
against it from this Name—a reaction which is no- 
thing else than a manifestation of the might of a 
holy, divine love.—[4. Itsform]. The constraining 
power of this reaction must be felt and exhibited 
in the Church, which is Christ’s body, and espe- 
cially in those who are the stewards of the Divine 
mysteries, and ambassadors speaking in His 
hame, urging them as by an irresistible impulse, 
and arousing them to a strong determination to 
make it effective upon the offender. And the 
Church in assembling for this purpose when 
occasion calls, should come together solemnly, 
attended by the presence and power of the Lord. 
Thus and thus only, in a manner truly valid, 
and with unfailing results, can he, who has de- 
secrated the name of Christ, and has proved 
unworthy of fellowship in His body, be cast out 
from the sphere of life in Christ, and from a 
participation in His protecting grace, and given 
over into the power of Satan to suffer the merited 
penalties of his sins. [5. The intent of this act 
is not punitive, but remedial, in consistency 
with the design of the whole Gospel dispensation, 
which was “to save and not to destroy;” and 
with the object of the power intrusted to the 
Apostle, and so to their successors, ‘‘ which was 
for edification and not for destruction.” And 
this intent must be displayed in the manner in 
which the act is performed, and in the hopes and 
prayers with which it is accompanied. For 
though the act of excommunication is in one 
sense a cutting off from the means of grace, in 
another it may itself be made a means of grace 
through the blessing of God which may follow 
the offender in his exclusion and turn the very 
severity of his sufferings into a glorious benefit. 
And where this result is not hindered by the 
obduracy of the guilty party, and he has not 
sinned past forbearance, we may expect 6. as the 
result, repentance and restoration. Nor is this 
surprising]. In bringing about such issues 
Satan, the arch enemy of Christ, is employed as 
his servant, even while he, on his part, seeks 
only to gratify his own love of corrupting, 
plaguing and destroying men. Our sinful nature, 
the organ of sin and the seat of its impure im- 
pulses, is given over into his power to be wasted 
and destroyed. And while in doing this, his 
intention is utterly to ruin, Christ aims at the 
ultimate deliverance of the spirit, which, having 
been enthralled by the flesh, is to be liberated 
through its weakening and destruction. He who 
inflicts the judgment, prescribes the limits beyond 
which the Evil One may not pass; yea, compels 
him to subserve the purposes of his holy love. 
This is one truth taught us in the Book of Job, 
although the author there is speaking not of 
punishment but of ‘proof and trial. The results 
of such discipline will be brought to light on that 
day when all things shall be revealed. And 
they will be brought to light in such a way that 
Satan will be put to shame, while God will be 
glorified in the midst of His own, even among 
those who have deeply fallen, as One who is 
wonderful in counsel and glorious in execution. 

[On this subject it will be profitable to consult 
Owen. Works. xvi. p. 151-183. Epwarps Serm. on 
Excom. Hooxer Le, Pol. Book V1]. 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
a a ee ae 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[As before we had the picture of a Church 
imperfectly united—still divided by the prevalence 
of ambition and conflicting opinions, so here we 
have a picture of one imperfectly purified, still 
carrying in itself the corruptions and spots of an. 
earlier depravity. And here we see: 1. How sin 
may convert the very grace of God into a war- 
rant for a lasciviousness even grosser than any 
which may be practised without, ver. 1.—How it 
shows more flagrant and abominable when seen - 
in a body professing holiness, than elsewhere, 
ver. 1-3. The melancholy aspect of a Church 
unconscious of its defilements, and flaunting in 
the conceit of its own perfection and beauty; and 
4, in contrast with this, the proper attitude of 
humiliation and sorrow that it ought to assume, 
ver. 2-5. The duty of observant and faithful 
ministers in the premises—to reprove remissness, 
and exhort the Church to self-purgation, ver. 
3—6. The duty of the Church made alive to its 
disgrace—to cast out the evil it cannot.cure, and 
consign the obdurate offender to the master he 
serves, a. with united action; ὦ. in the name of 
the Lord; 6. evincing a holy abhorence of sin; 
d. yet a love for the offender that shows itself in 
the desires and prayers for his recovery, ver. 5]. 

StarKE:—Since the scandal of crimes com- 
mitted in the Church is greater than that of 
those committed in the world, we should avoid 
them the more carefully, lament over them the 
more deeply, and punish them the more serupu- 
lously. The Church must tolerate the public re- 
buke of open offences, ver. 1.—Christians should 
mourn over the sins of their brethren as if these 
were personal afflictions (Ps. exix. 186; Ez. ix. 
4) ver. 2.—It is possible for us to promote the 
welfare of a Church even when absent, by 
prayer and by power [?] by writing and giving 
counsel, ver. 3.—Hup.: ‘How glorious the uses 
of excommunication!’ By it many an offender, 
who would otherwise continue in sin, and have 
part with the devil, is saved; by it the Church 
evinces its abhorence of evil, and shuns disgrace ; 
by it she keeps from participating in others’ sins, 
which, through connivance, would involve a whole 
people in guilt and punishment; and finally, by 
it she prevents the spread of iniquity, ver. 5. — 

Ber.en. Bis.:—Merely formal assemblies pro- 
fit nothing: the spirits must be present, and 
they must first be united by the power of Christ, 
ver. 4.—A true church-censure flows from love. 
Its aim is the preservation of the spirit. It has 
ever been God’s method to destroy a part, and 
that the least part, rather than to lose the whole. 
So the Gospel still keeps the preponderance. 
And though the act wears a legal aspect, it is 
evangelical in intent, aiming to save what be- 
longs to Christ.—We shall obtain salvation at 
the appearing of our Lord, provided we first 
awake from sleep, arise from the dead, and let 
Christ give us light, ver. 5. The toleration of 
even small things, which originate from impure 
sources, endangers the whole obedience of faith, 
ver. 6. 

Rieger :—Conceit and self-satisfaction, whether 
in individuals or communities, open the way for. 
carnal license. —A person must have dug deep in 


a 


CHAP. V. 6-13. 





poverty of spirit, if he takes not occasion from 
others’ trespasses to enhance his own reputa- 
tion —He who spares the rod hates his child. 
The omission of a lesser discipline only exposes 
the guilty one to greater judgments. 

Heupner:—The abominableness of incest, 
from which even the heathen shrank with hor- 
ror, must have a deep foundation in the nature 
of things, even in God, and not be sought for in 
the consequences alone, ver. 1. Public offences, 
when tolerated, involve the whole Church in 
guilt, even the better portion, partly because all 
are members of one body; and partly, because 
their toleration is a token of a want in the 
Church of zeal and watchfulness and care, for its 
order and welfare, ver. 2.—This power of cen- 
sure i. 6. of delivering over to Satan, which is 
now conceded to no one [?], is still invisibly 
exercised by Christ and His Apostles, over every 
Church, so that in their sight all unworthy per- 
sons are already excommunicated. Oh that we 
could ever bear in mind this scrutiny and judg- 
ment that is exercised over us from above!—The 
Christian Church is holy. It is a city set upon 
a hill, whose light shines far. Through offences 
and crimes its crown is trampied under foot. 
They are violations of the majesty of Christ.— 
The stringency of primitive Church discipline is 
no longer maintained. In congregations so 
mixed as ours, the consciousness of Christian 
communion has vanished, and public censure 
would be deemed a libel, and would fail of its 
end. Hence it only remains for the better mem- 
bers to withdraw their fellowship from every 
person who dishonors the Church, and refuses to 
reform, and so make manifest their displeasure at 
his conduct (Matth. xviii. 17). This would be 
a voluntary discipline wholly within the power 
of Christians, of which even the guilty party can- 
not complain, ver, 5.* 

Neanper:—lIt is well for the soul if it can 
be saved, even at the cost of bodily sufferings, 
ver. 5. 





[* These remarks apply only to churches united with 
the state; and they bring to view one great evil of the 
gtate-church system, and afford evidence of its utter incon- 
sistency with the whole idea of Christianity, and of its in- 
compatibility with the Gospel requirements]. 


X.—[B. The duty of Church purification in general. 








118 





[W. F. Besser:—lIt is not indeed granted the 
Church to know, or to determine what sort of 
evil Satan will inflict on one given over into His 
power. That he will not, however, slip the man 
on from one sin to another (Ps. lxix. 28; Rom. i. 
24), but will, on the contrary, sensibly touch him 
with this or that external evil or misfortune, this 
the Church knows, because it recognizes Satan as 
the personal power of evil, and it purposes in 
Christ that the strokes of the destroyer shall 
smite the flesh of the condemned party, whether 
it be to the destruction of his bodily life, or to 
the loss of his earthly prosperity, in order that 
the spirit of the returning penitent (and so his 
body too at last) shall be saved in the day of the 
Lord]. 

[F. W. Rosertson :—The Church excommuni- 
cates in a representative capacity. Man is the 
image of God, and man is the medium through 
which God’s absolution and God’s punishment 
are given and inflicted. Man is the mediator, 
because he represents God. His acts in this 
sense are, however, necessarily imperfect. There 
is but One in whom humanity was completely re- 
stored to the Divine Image, whose forgiveness 
and condemnation are exactly commensurate 
with God’s. Nevertheless, the Church here is 
the representation of that ideal man which 
Christ realized, and hence in a representative 
capacity condemns and forgives,—The indigna- 
tion of society is properly representative of the 
indignation of God. God is angry at sin, and 
when our hearts are sound and healthy, and our 
view of moral evil not morbid and sentimental, we 
feel it too. And in expressing this we represent 
and make credible God’s wrath. When the of- 
fender hears the voice of'condemnation and feels 
himself every where shunned, then conscience, 
which before had slumbered, begins to do its 
dreadful work, and the anger incurred becomes 
a type of coming doom. Thus is there lodged in 
Humanity a power to bind; and only so far as 
man is Christ-like can he exercise this power 
in an entirely true and perfect manner. (Ab- 
breviated*) ]. 


[* See his striking views on this subject more fully exhi- 
bited in his Serm, on Absolution in the 3d Vol. of his series.J 





Its motives, grounds, and limitations. Rectification 


of misconceptions as to his meaning in an earlier Epistle]. 


CuaptTer V. 6-18. 


6 Your glorying [That in which you glory] (5 not good. Know ye not that a little 
7 leaven leaveneth the whole lump?! Purge out therefore [omit therefore] the old 
leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our pass- 
8 over is sacrificed for us [omit for us*]: Therefore let us keep* the feast, not with old 
leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened 


9 bread of sincerity and truth. 


I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with for- 


10 nicators: Yet [omit Yet?] not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with 


114 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





the covetous, or [and*] extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs® go out 
11 of the world. But now’ I have written [I wrote] unto you not to keep company, it 
any man that is called a brother be® a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a 


12 railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no not to eat. 


For what 


have I to do to judge them also® that are without? do not ye judge them that are 


13 within? 


But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore [omit therefore”] put 


away” from among yourselves that wicked person [τὸν πονηρὸν, the wicked one]. 


1 Ver. 6.—The variations δολοῖ and φθείρει are glosses. 


2 Ver. 7.—The οὖν of the Rec., as well as the καί before οὐ, ver. 10, and the καί before ἐξάρατε, ver. 13, are connective 


particles that are feebly supported. 


(They are not found in A. B Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.]} 


3 Ver. 7.—irép ἡμῶν after ἡμῶν is a dogmatic gloss, which has all the most important authorities against it. [This 
sentence ought to be rendered: ‘For our passover has been sacrificed, even Christ.’ | 

4 Ver. 8.—[“ eopragouev, A. D., but εορτάζωμεν. B. C. F L. Cod. Sin.” Atr.] 

5 Ver. 10.—The Rec. ἤ is feebly supported and is an alteration to conform to the general context. [A. B. C. Dl. F. Cod. 


Sin. all have καί.] 


6 Ver. 10._{The Rec. has ὀφείλετε with B3., which Alf. calls “a correction from misunderstanding.” Wordsworth and 


Meyer retain it. A. B1. C. Ὁ. F. L. Cod. Sin. have ὠφείλετε. It would then read: ‘Ye ought to have gone.’ 


“The necessity 


would long ago have occurred and the act passed. And this Lachmann, Tisch., Riickert, approve.] 
7 Ver. 11.—[{The Ree. has νυνὶ with C. D. Cod. Sint; and so Meyer, Words. But A. B. F. L. Cod. Sin’. have all νῦν, which 


Alf. adopts.] 


8 Ver. 11.—The Ree. ἤ is accented according to the analogy of what follows. But ἦ is best authorized [being supported 


by nearly all the ancient versions. ] 


9 Ver. 12.—The καί has indeed many important authorities against it. [A. B. C. F. Cod. Sin.] But it might very easily 
have been omitted as dispensable, and ought to be retained with Meyer and ‘Vischendorf. [Alf. omits it.] 
[19 Ver. 13.—The Rec. καὶ ἐξαρεῖτε arouse from Deut. xxiv.7. ᾿Εξάρατε is decidedly better supported. A. B.C. Di. F. 


Cod..Sin.] 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[In this section the specific duty of excom- 
municating an incestuous church member is ex- 
panded into the broader one of individual and 
eocial purification in general. And this is exhi- 
bited under a familiar metaphor, and enforced 
by reasons drawn from it. In entering upon it 
Paul starts with alluding to that state of mind 
which presented so strange a contrast to their 
actual condition. ] 

Ver. 6. That in which you boast is not 
good.—In view of the word here rendered, 
‘boasting’ (καύχημα), the question arises, whe- 
ther it is the act, or the ground of boasting that is 
intended. The latter meaning is certainly the 
one which prevails in the New Testament, even 
2 Cor. ix. 8, [and this is in accordance with the 
passive form of the noun]. Then we should 
render it: ‘that of which you boast;’ and while 
with the other signification οὐ καλόν would mean: 
‘it does not become you,’ efe., it would in the 
other case be rendered: ‘is not seemly or beau- 
tiful,’ implying that it is, rather, hateful. It 
is not, however, the incestuous person that is 
meant [as Hammond and Whitby singularly sug- 


gest, supposing him to have been a man of some 


reputation for wisdom and eloquence], but the 
whole condition of the Church, the complete cor- 
ruption of which he proceeds to illustrate by a 
familiar comparison.—Know ye not that a 
little leaven leaveneth the whole lump ? 
—In like manner, he implies, that the whole 
Church was infected by one crime, tolerated in 
the midst of it. The ‘little leaven’’ here refers 
not so much to the person in question, as to the 
vice of fornication, which had brokén out upon 
him in its worst form. ‘It denotes some im- 
purity of the former state, not yet purged out,— 
a little remnant of which, if allowed, was suffi- 
cient to corrupt again the salvation already ob- 
tained, and render it ineffective.” Burcer. [It 
is not, however, says Alford, the ‘‘ danger of cor- 
ruption hereafter” by the future spread of the to- 
lerated evil, that he here speaks of, but ‘the 





character already tainted” by its presence among 
them in this one instance.” But are not the con- 
sequences merely anticipated in their certainty, 
and the future and present all included under 
one view? The leaven and its working must 
here be taken together]. The same comparison, 
used to illustrate a corrupting influence, occurs 
in Gal. y. 9, and Matth. xvi. 6, and the parallel 
passages. On the other hand, it appears in 
Matth. xiii. 89, and in the parallel passages, to 
illustrate the penetrating and pervading power 
of Divine grace. 

In consequence of the contagious effects of 
tolerated evil, Paul gives the following exhorta- 
tion:—Purge out.—Exxavaipew sometimes is 
followed by the Accus. of the thing cleansed, and 
sometimes, as here, with that of the thing re- 
moved. [Stanley calls it ‘‘a strong expression,” 
and remarks that the duty it enjoins was ‘‘carried 
out in later times with such extreme punctili- 
ousness, that on the fourteenth day they searched 
with candles into the darkest holes and corners to 
see whether any leaven remained.” }—The old 
leaven.—This, in accordance with what has 


been said, does not indicate the incestuous per- 


son, so that the command would only be a repe- 
tition of that in ver. 2 and 18, but the moral evil 
which was defiling the Church. This he calls 
‘old,’ because it was the remains of their former 


unregenerate state which, like leaven, was still — 


at work vitiating their character.—That ye 
may be a fresh lump, νέον φύραμα.--- 
wherein there is no leaven, hence a complete 
whole, morally renewed by purification—a 
Church holy and free from sin, evincing its 
early love and zeal. (Starke). (Νέος, fresh differs 
from xavéc, which means new, entirely different 
from what it was before). —What follows clearly 
shows that the Apostle had in mind the prac- 
tice of the Israelites removing leaven from their 
houses before the Passover began.—As ye are 
unleavened.—Thus he designates the Church 
ideally considered, and as it can become only 
through the power of Divine grace, and shows 
the divinely postulated character of its members 


— 


CHAP. V. 6-13. 


\ 


ship; and hence it presents an argument for re- 


moving the existing evil, as he enjoins them to | 


do. They are to come up to their true ideal. 
[Conybeare and Howson, however, interpret this 
clause literally, as alluding to the condition in 
which the Jewish portion of the Church were at 
that moment, it being the time of Passover: 
«« Even as ye, at this Paschal season, are without 
the taint of leaven.” This view Alf. combats at 
length. His strongest argument, and one which 
must be deemed conclusive, is that it is ‘* wholly 
alien from the habit and spirit of the-Apostle. ‘*The 
ordinances of the Old Law,” he says, ‘‘are to 
Paul not points, on whose actual observance to 
ground spiritual lessons, but things passed away 
in their literal acceptance, and become spiritual 
verities in Christ.” Kling’s view is the one gene- 
rally adopted, and in refutation of the one above 
suggested, he adds further]. It would evidently 
transcend the meaning of the term, afvuoe to 
make it mean those who eat no leaven, or ob- 
serve the festival of unleavened bread, 7. e., the 
Jews, nor would such a meaning be applicable 
to the case of a Church composed mainly of 
heathen converts. But it may be fitly used of 
all professing Christians, inasmuch as they are 
themselves supposed to be free from those sinful 
corruptions which prevail without in the world, 
and which are here denoted by the leaven. And 
such an interpretation accords with the pre- 
vious phrase “ἃ fresh lump.” The translation 
of ἔστε by: ‘ye ought to be,’ instead of 
by: ‘ye are’ [as Chrysostom, Theoph., and 
after them Billroth, Flatt and Pott, and many 
others suggest], though in itself incorrect, 
would point to the ideal view of Christians ex- 
pressed in the word ‘unleavened.’ [But the 
strongest argument for the interpretation given 
above of the clause before us, is in what follows, 
where we see that the Apostle’s mind was moving 
not in the sphere of Jewish carnal ordinances, 
but among the higher verities which they typi- 
fied]|.—For our Passover also has been 
sacrificed even Christ.—[Such can only be 
rendering of the words, καὶ γὰρ τὸ πάσχα 
ἡμῶν ἐτύϑη Χριστός. The main subject 
is evidently τὸ πάσχα; and the intent of the 
Apostle is to show the propriety of speaking of 
Christians as unleayened, since they, too, had a 
paschal offering, which was Christ. Kling, how- 
ever, goes on to raise the question]. Does this 
declaration furnish the ground of what immedi- 
ately precedes? or is it a further argument for 
the whole exhortation? In the former case, the 
sense would be: ye are free from that corrup- 
tion by virtue of that redemption achieved by 
Christ. But such connection would suit, pro- 
vided only, that we took the term ““ unleavened ” 
in the sense rejected above. [But why so? Why 
not consider it as justifying the application of 
the term to Christians also, on the ground that 
they likewise had a passover which obliged them 
to be free from the corruption which the leaven 
symbolized?] We, therefore, refer the clause 
to the whole exhortation, as furnishing an argu- 
ment for that. [And such, no doubt, is the 
more extended bearing of it.] As among the 
Israelites from the first day of the feast to the 
slaying of the Paschal lamb, it was the rule to 
put away all leaven and all unleavened bread 








115 





from their houses, so likewise were Christians 
under obligation to put away all former sinful 
practices—the leaven of wickedness—inasmuch 
as their Paschal lamb, even Christ, had been 
slain. And here we have an evidence that the 
ancient Paschal lamb was a type of Christ. And 
to this also Jno. xix. 36, plainly conducts us. 
The point of comparison is, primarily, the re- 
deeming power of the blood of the victim. It 
was with this that at the time of their departure 
from Egypt, the lintels and doorposts of the Is- 


| raelites were sprinkled, and by reason of this 


that those within were preserved from the de- 
stroying sword, while the Egyptians fell under 
its stroke. In like manner under the new dis- 
pensation, which fulfils the old, it is said the 
hearts of believers are sprinkled by the blood 
of Christ (Heb. x. 22; xii. 24; 1 Pet. i. 12), and 
thus saved from destruction. The slaying of the 
Paschal lamb accordingly obtains the character 
of a sacrifice (Sve), and indeed of an expiatory, 
covenant kind, forming a distinction between the 
members of the covenant, whose sins are covered 
with its blood, and the others who are left to 
their doom. Worthy of consideration, though 
somewhat problematical, is Liicke’s and Meyer’s 
observation, that this designation of Christ ac- 
cords with John’s account of the crucifixion 
which places it on the day of the slaying of the 
Paschal lamb* (contrary to the account of the 
Synoptists), and can only be explained on this 
ground. But, however this may be, a powerful 
motive is found in this fact for moral purifica- 
tion. (comp. 1 Pet. 11. 24).—This is further 
carried out in 

Ver. 8. Let us therefore keep the feast. 
—The previous command in a milder form— 
that of an exhortation to a social solemnity, for 
which the expression, ‘‘our Passover,” forms a 
fit transition. The whole context alludes to the 
Easter festival; and it is highly probable that 
the Apostle wrote the Epistle at or near the ap- 
proach of Easter (comp. xvi. 8), and, being full 
of the idea, gave to his exhortation a correspond- 
ing form. That the Christian festival of Easter, 
commemorating the resurrection of our Lord, had 
already been established, can hardly be affirmed. 
But that Gentile converts united with the Jewish, 
to celebrate the Passover in commemoration of its 
fulfilment through Christ, is too probable to be 
denied. In any case, it is safe to assert with 
Osiander, that it was solemnized in spirit. As 
for the rest, the language is figurative. The 
duty indicated is not the outward, but the in- 
ward spiritual observance, namely, the united 
offering of praise to God for His redeeming 
grace, through the maintenance of a Christian 
conversation (comp. Osiander). [Hodge, Alf., 
Stanley, agree in the opinion that there is no 
reference here to the keeping of the Passover 
festival, nor yet to the observance of the Lord’s 
Supper (though Wordsworth regards ‘‘the text 
as specially applicable to a consideration of the 
privileges and duties” connected with this), but, 
as Kling, to that ‘‘continued Passover feast,” 
that ‘‘sacred festival’? of a consecrated life, 
which should follow upon our union to Christ in 


[* See this disproved, and the whole chronology of our 
Lord’s last acts fully discussed in ANDREW’s “Life of our 
Lord,” pp. 423-460: also LANGE on Matth. pp. 456 and 468]. 


116 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—_— eee συ συ οςξ0;ΠἧςὌ,.:-’--. 


His death, even as a feast, professedly of holy 
joy and gladness, protracted through seven days 
always followed upon the observance of the Pas- 
sover among the Jews]. 

How the feast was to be kept is explained still 
further; first, negatively.—not with old lea- 
ven,—which he had just told them to purge 
out (ver. 7), and which he goes on further to 
describe in words which are to be understood, 
not as introducing a new thought, but as expla- 
natory of the ‘former.—neither with the 
leaven of malice and wickedness.—What, 
in point of fact is one, is here formally distin- 
guished; or we may say with Meyer, that of the 
kind in general one particular is selected and 
made prominent. The preposition év with, in- 
dicates that with which the feast was accom- 
panied, or in which its character was violated. 

The Genitives are those of apposition, ‘the 
eaven which is,’ &c. See Winer, ¢ 59, 8, a]. 
Kaxia denotes the opposite of that love which 
seeks the welfare of another—a desire and effort 
to injure a neighbor (Eph. iv. 81); πονηρία [““15 
a still stronger word” Hopae], and denotes 
wickedness, villany [‘‘the performance of evil 
with persistency and delight. Hence Satan is 
called ὁ sovypéc”—Hovee]. In contrast with 
these we have the true method expressed.—but 
with the unleavened bread of sincerity 
and truth.—Hid:cpivera is purity—the quality 
of having been proved in the sunlight (eA7) and 
found (κρίνεται) genuine; ἀλήϑεια, the harmony 
of man with himself, and with Divine truth, 
which is made known in the uprightness of con- 
duct. To distinguish these terms as indicating, 
the one the substance, the other the manifestation 
of goodness, and thus as expressing the opposite 
to κακία, the substance, and πονηρία, the manifesta- 
tion of evil would be too abstract. Bengel’s 
distinction: ‘‘xaxia is vice, as contrary to virtue, 
and that virtue unalloyed, or insincerity, and 
πονηρία, wickedness, a8 in those who strenuously 
defend and retain κακίαν, and is opposed to the 
truth ’’—is very uncertain. Wecan better ac- 
cept the distinction he makes between εἰλικρίν- 
era and aan%evca—< the former takes care not to 
admit evil with the good, the latter not to admit 
evil instead of good.” For other attempts to 
discriminate between these words, see Starke in 
loco. [Also Trencu ‘Syn. of the New Testa- 
ment.” % xi., and W. Wesster ‘‘Syntax and Syn. 
of the New Testament,” pp. 194, 195]. 

Ver. 9-13.1 We here have an episode to the 
proper subject of this paragraph, which is re- 
sumed again in ver. 192, The exhortation given 
above suggests the correction of a misunder- 
standing in regard to the meaning of a certain 
passage ina previous letter, which he had written 
to them about holding intercourse with fornica- 
tors.—I wrote to you in the Epistle.—The 
stringency of theological dogmatism, which re- 
fuses to admit the loss of any Apostolic writing, 
insists that the reference here is to a previous 
passage in this Epistle, viz., ver. 2and6. But 
such reference neither suits the expression ‘in 
the Epistle,’ nor yet the contents of the verses 
cited. The allusion must therefore be to some 
earlier letter now lost. [This is the conclusion 
of Calvin, Beza, Bengel, de Wette, Meyer, Words- 
worth, Alford, Hodge, Barnes, and most other 





modern commentators, and as Words. argues, 
‘is perfectly consistent with the position, ‘that 
no Canonical Book of Holy Scripture has been 
lost.’”? Stanley, however, ingeniously argues 
for the other view, advocated mainly by the 
Greek Fathers, also by Hammond and Whitby, 
and asks whether there are not indications that 
the whole passage from y. 9 to vi. 8 is, in some 
sense, a distinct note, a postscript not merely 
to vy. 6-8, but also to vi. 9-20? This he 
says has been already conjectured by two Eng- 
lishmen, J. Edwards and Dr. Thos. Arnold, and 
he alludes in the way of comparison to a re- 
markable passage in Livy. iv. 20, called by Nie- 
buhr, the only instance of a mode in any ancient 
author. Similar digressions he thinks he finds 
elsewhere, also in Paul’s Epistles. To say the 
least, he makes a very plausible case, and his 
arguments, if not convincing, are very interest- 
ing].—not to keep company with fornica- 
tors.— Συναναμίγνεσϑαι, to mingle oneself up with, 
as in.2 Thess. iii. 14; the Inf. after verbs of 
counselling, or commanding. The warning thus 
conveyed they had interpreted to mean, that 
they should hold no intercourse at all with per- 
sons of the sort mentioned; and they did this 
perhaps from a secret disinclination to follow 
Paul’s instruction, and in their letter had pointed 
out the utter impracticability of the thing. He 
therefore goes on now to explain himself more 
exactly upon the subject. 

Ver. 10. Not altogether with the forni- 
cators of this world.—'The ellipsis here is 
certainly to be supplied from the foregoing—‘I 
wrote not to mingle with.’ But the question is, 
whether these words are to be inserted after 
‘not,’ so as to separate it from ‘altogether’ 
(πάντως), or whether these two words are to be 
taken together; and then, in the latter case, 
whether the two are to be joined with ‘I wrote,’ 
or with the nouns following, In our opinion, 
the separation of ‘not altogether’ (οὐ πάντως), 
ought, if possible, to be avoided. But if we con- 
nect the words unitedly, to ‘I wrote,’ and ren- 
der the clause: ‘I did by no means write to you 
not to associate with the wicked,’ then it has the 
appearance of ‘promoting directly such inter- 
course. [‘‘And this, although perhaps the more 
common explanation, does not give so good 
sense.” Hopar]. They had better therefore be 
joined with what follows, in the way of limita- 
tion; ‘not entirely and under all circumstances’ 
with the fornicators of this world. By the epi- 
thet, ‘of this world,’ the persons alluded to are 
distinguished from those of the same class found 
in the Church.—Since he is treating, in this para- 
graph, of moral purification in general, he adds 
yet other sorts of persons who presented a de- 
cided contrast to the Christian character, and 
with whom it was unbecoming in them to associate 
—persons whom he had already spoken of in his 
previous letter.—or with the converts and 
extortioners.—These two classes go together, 
as may be seen by the καὶ and, which connect 
them—a reading better supported than ἢ, or of 
the Rec. The πλεονέκτης is one who means to 
have more than his neighbors, or, more than 
belongs to him, and who therefore indulges in 
frauds, and overreaching, and oppression. This 
trait is more prominently brought out in the 


CHAP. V. 6-13. 





second term, ἅρπαξ, which denotes one who mani- 
fests his greed of gain in robbery and plun- 
der. [Conybeare renders the former of these 
words: ‘lascivious person,’ and says that ““ πλέο- 
νεξία in St. Paul almost invariably means impu- 
rity.” And Stanley advocates this interpreta- 
tion as being more in accordance with the drift 
of discourse. And there is not a little to justify 
the view taken. Sensuality and rapine most 
frequently go together as branches from the 
same root of covetousness, and stand in close 
connection with idolatry. The same view is 
also maintained by Hammond, who explains the 
mAcovéxtacc to mean ‘men of inordinate lusts;’ 
and in consistency with this, supported by no 
small show of classic authorities, translates 
ἅρπαγες, ravishers. But there is no special rea- 
son why ‘‘the extraordinary sense” should be 
adopted here; and the conjunction ‘and’ seems 
to affiliate the words in meaning with the other 
to which it is thus connected. See Trencu, NV. 
T. Syn. 3 24].—or with idolaters.—To those 
who violate the rights of neighbors, he joins 
such as violate the highest right—that of God. 
And in this religious aberration is found the 
source of all moral aberration. [‘‘ This is said 
to be the earliest known instance of the use of 
the word εἰδωλολάτρης; it is never used in the 
LXX,, although εἴδωλον is constantly employed 
in that version to denote ‘false gods.’’? Hovae]. 
That the prohibition which he had formerly 
given could not have been meant in the broad 
sense supposed by his readers, he now shows 
apagogically by exhibiting the absurdity of the 
thing.—Since, indeed, ye must then have 
gone out of the world.—The apa, in that case, 
following upon ἐπεὶ, since, shows yet more defi- 
nitely the consequence which would ensue upon 
the interpretation put on his language. Pro- 
perly a protasis is here to be supplied. ‘If it 
were so as you say, why then in that case,’ etc. 
[For the force of ἄρα, see Winer 2 LIII. a]. 
Κόσμος, world, in this last clause, is to be taken 
in its physical, not, as in the first clause, in its 
ethical sense. The world is full of bad people, 
with whom we are compelled to deal, in some 
form, in business or traffic, by the very exigen- 
cies of our earthly lot; and if we would avoid 
them altogether, we can only do it by quitting 
the world altogether. 

Ver. 11. But now I wrote to you.—He 
cannot here be repeating what was in the former 
Epistle, for had the words which follow been 
there, the misunderstanding could not have 
arisen. Νῦν dé ἔγραψα must accordingly 
imply: ‘but now my meaning was,’ νῦν being 
taken in its logical sense, as referring back to 
the previous statement (comp. xv. 20; xii. 18; 
xix.6). In like manner λέγω and ἔλεγον often 
stand for: ‘this is what I mean, or meant, by 
what I say, or said.’ So i. 12 and elsewhere. 
This interpretation is better suited to the con- 
text. We have here the positive explanation of 
a former declaration, following upon the nega- 
tive one in ver. 10,—and not a new declaration 
made ‘now’ (νῦν), differing from that made ‘in 
the Epistle,” ver. 10; in which case the aorist 
ἔγραψα: I wrote, must be taken after the old 
epistolary style as referring to what was said in 
process of writing (see Meyer in loco). [‘«Thus 


117 


\ 
by the right rendering, we escape the awkward 
inference deducible from the ordinary interpre- 
tation, that the Apostle had previously given a 
command and now retracted it.’’ Axr.].—not 
to keep company, if any one called a 
brother be a fornicator.—The participle 
ὀνομαζόμενος, called, forms an antithesis to 9, 
15, as contrasting profession with reality. To con- 
nect the participle with the following noun [as 
Augustine, Ambrose, Estius, and others], so as to 
read: ‘be a reputed, or notorious fornicator,’ 
would be alike opposed to the drift of the passage, 
and to the usage of language. ᾿Ὀνομάζεσϑαι can 
mean only: to be called, or, to be honorably men- 
tioned. Besides in this case the text would have 
been: ἀ δελφός Tc, —Or a Covetous, or an idol- 
ater.—The term idolater, as applied to one called 
a brother, must denote, [not an open worshipper 
of idols, for such a person would hardly have 
been found among the brethren], but one wha 
ate of the heathen sacrifices, and participated in 
the heathenish customs connected therewith-—a 
practice alludedtoin x. 14. Then enlarging his 
catalogue beyond that of ver. 10, he adds,—or a 
railer, or a drunkard,—yétvooc, a term 
which in old Greek was used of women only,—or 
an extortioner; with such a one neither 
to eat.—This does not refer to communion at 
love-feasts, or at the Lord’s Supper; but to as- 
sociation at ordinary meals, a practice which 
would indicate intimate companionship. The 
characters described, they were not to entertain 
as guests, nor visit as hosts, nor unite with them 
at a party in the house of a common acquain- 
tance; but they were to cut them off from their 
society and rive it to be understood that they 
would have nothing in common with them. 
‘‘ Here we learn what sins justify excommunica- 
tion. We must also suppose that among the 
converts at Corinth, here and there, a reaction 
towards their former state had already taken 
place.”” NEANDER. 

Vers. 12,13. A further reason why he could 
have designed his exhortation only in a limited 
sense. The contrary would have been an as- 
sumption of authority over those not Christians, 
an application of discipline to them which was 
not allowed him.—For what have I to do, 
π-τί γάρ yor.—The expression is pure Greek. 
It means, ‘what concern is it of mine? It does 
not belong to my office.’—-to judge also those 
without.—0i ἔξω, was a designation applied 
by the Jews to the heathen, and by Christians to 
unbelievers. The latter are without, because 
they are outside the pale of God’s Church—not 
to be found among His people. In like manner 
Col.iv. 5, 1 Thess. iv. 12. His refusal to judge 
such he sustains by a reference to their own pro- 
cedure.—do not ye judge them that are 
within ?—The τοῦς ἔσω, holding the empha- 
tic place, forms the antithesis to τοῦς ἔξω, and 
ὑμεῖς to μοι. Then the argument is: ‘since 
you yourselves confine your jurisdiction to those 
within the Church, you had noreason to ascribe 
to me advice which went beyond this limit.’ It 
would be clearly wrong to separate, as some 
[Theoph. Hammond, Michaelis, Rosenmuller ] do, 
δυχί from what follows, and then take the veri 
in the Imper. g.d., ‘No, judge ye,’ ete. It would 
then have read, οὐδέν, nothing, as the reply to the 


- 





118 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





previous question; and ἀλλά, but, would have ap- 
peared after it. In saying ‘ye,’ Paul does not 
mean to exclude himself. This would be con- 
trary to what he had just enjoined in vy. 3-5.— 
—But those without God will judge, or 
judgeth.—tThis clause is best taken by itself, 
affirmatively, and not as continuing the previous 
question: ‘The right to judge unbelievers be- 
longs solely to God, not to youor me.’ Whether 
the verb here is to be taken in the present or fu- 
ture is doubtful, for the accentuation is uncertain 
—whether κρίνει or κρινεῖ. If the latter—the 
future, the reference is to the last judgment. 
But this is not what Paul has exclusively in 
mind. ‘laken in the present, it corresponds best 
with the previous clauses. [“ These remarks 
about judging form a transition point to the sub- 
ject of the next chapter. But having now fur- 
nished his explanation of the prohibition for- 
merly given, and with this subject of the forni- 
cator among them, he gives, before passing on, 
a plain command in terms for the excommunica- 
tion (but no more) of the offender. And this he 
does in the very words of Deut. xxiv. 7, from 
which the reading καὶ ἐξαρεῖτε has come.” ALF. 
and this he does without any connecting word, the 
abruptness being characteristic].—Put away 
the wicked one from among your own 
selves.—lIn this he but resumes the chief topic 
of this section, which had not been altogether 
abandoned. Even during the seeming digres- 
sion, Paul clinches it. There is no sign of that 
momentary passionate outburst which Riickert 
detects. The reference intov πονηρόν: that 
wicked one, is to fornicator, not to the devil, 
as Calvin supposes, whose power was to be 
averted by the removal of what was evil and im- 
pure. Sucha reference is disproved by the plain 
citation here from Deuteronomy.* Ἔξ ὑμῶν 
αὐτῶν is emphatic: ‘from out of the midst of 
yourselves.’ 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1. Christ the antitype of the Paschal Lamb. 
Thus the Old Testament pours light upon the 
New, and reveals to us the meaning of Christ’s 
mission. As the Paschal Lamb saved the Israel- 
ites from destruction through the sprinkling of 
its blood upon their habitations, so Christ saves 
His people, not by instruction, not by example, 
not by the converting grace of His Spirit, though 
these means are included in His work—but pri- 
marily, by giving His blood for their ransom. 
He is our Redeemer in virtue of His having made 
Himself a sacrifice for us. This truth is involved 
in the very word employed to designate the na- 
ture of His death, ἐτύϑη---ῶὦ word appropriated 
to denote the slaying of victims at an altar. 
And should it be objected that the Paschal Lamb 
was not, properly speaking, a sacrifice, it not 
having been offered at an altar, nor through a 
priest, nor in a consecrated place, thus answer- 





(* And yet Calvin’s interpretation is more in accordance 
with the enlarged course of thought pursued in the latter 
part of the chapter, and carries with it greater force. It 
also explains the abruptness with which the injunction is 
introduced. The grand finale of the whole matter is: ‘ Put 
the wicked one away from the midst of you—the wicked 
one and all that belongs to him.” This seems more natural 
than to suppose a recurrence to a matter already settled]. 





ing to the requisitions of a sacrifice, it is enough 
to reply that it is so called in Scripture in va- 
rious places (Ex. xii. 27; xxiii. 18; xxxiv. 25; 
Deut. xvi. 2, 4, 5, 6), and had all the effect of an 
expiatory offering. Indeed, it seems to have 
been the root out of which the whole sacrificial 
system grew. And as its offering was the very 
condition on which the Israelites escaped the 
doom of Egypt which set them free, and as its 
observance was the condition of continued mem- 
bership in the ransomed nation, so is the death 
of Christ the ground of the sinner’s exemption 
from the condemnation and curse resting upon 
the world, and the continued commemoration of 
that death is a duty imposed on all that would 
be numbered among His saints]. 

[2. Both the sanctification of the individual be-~ 
liever, and the purification of the Church as a body, 
necessarily follow from the fact of our redemption 
through the sucrifice of Christ. As the Israelites 
were redeemed to be a ‘kingdom of priests and 
a holy nation” (Ex. xxx. 6), so is the Church 
redeemed to be ‘‘a royal priesthood and a holy 
nation” (1 Pet. ii. 9). And this purpose is 
realized under the inspiring motive of grateful 
joy for the deliverance vouchsafed. Hence the 
whole of every truly Christian life becomes a 
holy festival, an offering of praise to God for the 
glorious works He hath done for us through 
Christ. His redemption was nothing less than 
the achievement of a Divine love that conde- 
scended to take upon itself the doom of the sin- 
ner, and expiate his guilt by the sacrifice of a 
life assumed in his nature, Now where this 
fact is known and felt, there the sin thus atoned 
for can no longer be tolerated in its selfishness 
and lovelessness. He who truly believes that 
Christ died for him in love, himself becomes 
‘(dead unto sin” (Rom. vi. 11). In him the 
body of sin with all its affections and lusts is 
nailed upon the cross of his Lord, and the life 
he henceforth leads, is maintained in fellowship 
with that Saviour who loved him and gave Him- 
self for him. Thus it is that malice and wicked- 
ness are purged away, and instead thereof we 
see a life of simplicity and truth manifesting it- 
self in word and deed; and this, not under the 
constraints of legal obligation and fear, but under 
the actuating power of deyout gratitude and 
joyful devotion. Such is the ideal of a Christian 
life. And so far as this ideal is realized, both 
the Church as a whole, and every individual in 
the Church becomes a temple of God where He 


is perpetually worshipped and where a true — 


and lasting festival goes on]. 

8. It follows from the above that wherever the 
Christian life isin full and vigorous exercise, 
there the Church will, as far as possible, main- 
tain a discipline, which shall separate between 


the holy and the profane, and preserve its own © 


consistency and integrity; there Christians will 
withhold the title of ‘brother’ from every pro- 
fessor that walketh disorderly, and will take 
heed how they countenance by their friendly 





[* See Archb. Magee’s conclusive argument on this subject 
in his “Atonement and Sacrifice,’ Note xxxv. Kurtz Sacri- 
ficial Worship, ? 180, and articles on “Passover” in Κιττο 
Bib. Ency., and Smirn’s Bible Dict. Also Baur Symbolik, 
Vol. IL., p. 627 ff., Lance Life of Christ, Edinburgh. Trang 
IV., p.149, and Lange Matth. xxvi. 1-5]. 


——oO ΠΛΧΛἽἊὺΝ 


CHAP. V. 6-13. 





society those who openly dishonor the name 
after which they are called; there the vices 
which stain the Christian character will be re- 
garded with greater abhorrence and put under 
severer censure than those which are openly 
practised by the world. And this discipline will 
be the natural operation of that holy love which 
the death of Christ enkindles, manifesting itself 
both in the ordinary intercourse of life, and 
through official acts. Without this vital power, 
Church discipline, however exercised, may indeed 
succeed in maintaining a creditable external or- 
der, and in carrying on a creditable conflict 
with public immoralities, but it never can ac- 
complish an inward renovation, or bring to pass 
deep and lasting results. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[1. The Church of God, as a body redeemed 
from condemnation by the death of Christ, is 
thereby put under obligations to purge itself 
from all sin and immoralities, and to preserve a 
saintly character andappearance. The inflation 
of vanity is one evidence of the working of the 
leaven of wickedness, and should excite suspi- 
cion of its presence ver. 6.—No immoralities 
should be tolerated under the pretext that they 
are small, because—1, the toleration of them in- 
dicates a general laxity of principle; and 2, en- 
dangers the purity of the whole body by a vicious 
infection ver. 6; and 3, is contrary to the ideal 
character of the Church ver. 7. The sins of 
our former state are especially to be guarded 
against, and the remains of them to be searched 
for and cast out. They both desecrate the purity 
and mar the joy of what should be the Chris- 
tian’s life-long feast ver. 7.—The Church, 
though separate from the world, is yet to exist 
in the world; and one of the problems it must 
solve is soto mingle with the ungodly and pro- 
fane as not to compromise its character or coun- 
tenance iniquity, and yet so as to maintain peace 
with all men and win the worst to Christ. The 
principles which should regulate its intercourse 
with the world are thus given by Barnes: ‘a. The 
Church is not to be compared to the world in any 
of its peculiar and distinguishing features; ὁ. It 
must treat all men justly and righteously; δ. Its 
members must discharge all obligations and du- 
ties belonging to the social relations; d. They 
must do good to all men; e. They must so asso- 
ciate with sinners as to be able to work for their 
salvation’ (vv. 9, 10).—Those that are justly 
liable to church censure, and must be excommu- 
nicated, are the openly immoral and profane. 
But while these characters in the Church are to 
be judged by the Church, the world without is to 
be left to the judgment of God. And this 
judgment is to be exercised in the Church in or- 
der that those who are judged by it may, if pos- 
sible, escape the condemnation awaiting the 
world (ver. 12).] 

Starke:—If evil be allowed free course, the 
result will be a settled wantonness of character, 
leading the person to commit iniquity without 
reserve—yea, even with pleasure and determina- 
tion; and then to ignore guilt, or so to varnish 
it over that the villain beneath shall not be sus- 
pected under the fair outside. Sin has its lurk- 


119 





ing holes, and must be hunted out through them 
all. Alas, for the few genuine Easter days which 
Christians enjoy, ver. 8.—Of what profit is it te 
leave the world and skulk away in the mountains 
and clefts of the wilderness? The old Adam 
will skulk with thee even there. Drive him out, 
and then will thy heart itself be a blessed soli- 
tude, where Christ will come and converse with 
thee. So associate with open sinners as to teach, 
not learn—warn, not confirm—help to life, not 
hasten to death (ver. 9-10).—Look out for home; 
God will take care of things abroad.—In order 
to effective Church discipline, the majority of 
the Church must themselves be sound yer. 13. 

Beruen. Brset:—lf thy wrong is made public 
and judged, count it not as an injury; for a 
genuine purification requires that we do not 
withdraw our iniquity from condemnation and 
destruction. Now that Christ has died for our 
justification, and sent us His Spirit for our sanc- 
tification, this personal purification may be 
justly required. We ought to do it, because now 
we can do it—not, however, in our own strength, 
but in that of our risen Saviour (ver. 7).—The 
true Passover festival of Christians is followed 
by ἃ constant succession of Sabbaths, wherein 
they daily rise with Christ to newness of life. 
He who has learned this, keeps Easter all the 
time. Christ’s life is his life; and this life is 
peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. His festival 
will terminate only when Christ ceases to be 
ver. 8.—If we must be surrounded by the 
world, let us take care to abide with ourselves 
through a constant inward intercourse with God. 
In such a case the world will not harm us. 

Hrevusner:—tThe Pericope on Easter. To the 
worthy celebration of Easter there belongs—1, 
repentance vy. 6,7; 2, faith and joy, because 
of redemption ver.7; 38, new resolves for 
greater sanctification (ver. 8).—The life of a 
Christian is a continuous Easter—1, in ceaseless 
repentance and sorrow for man’s fall; 2, in con- 
stant looking to Christ, the risen, reigning Lord. 
—Easter as the festival of a spiritual resurrec- 
tion—1. Its necessity as a memorial of the Apos- 
tacy, since from one sin the whole race has been 
corrupted vy. 6,7. 2. It shows the possibility 
of redemption. Only One, Christ, can raise us 
from our fall ver. 7. 3. It isa general demand 
to walk in newness of life, in order to become fit 
for eternal life through sanctification (ver. 8). 
HEUBNER. 

F. W. Brssrr:—We, too, have a Paschal 
Lamb. It was a giftfrom God. What has God 
from us in return? Wehave the true Paschal 
Lamb. God requires of us the true Easter-cake. 
What vile ingratitude, if we are disobedient! 
(ver. 7). Daily would we celebrate Easter in 
spirit, provided we daily acknowledge, enjoy 
and praise our Paschal Lumb, ‘ who was slain for 
us once for all’ (Heb. χ. 10). ‘The time of the 
N. T. is a perpetual festal period,” says Au- 
gustine. God’s word exhorts you to purge out 
the old leaven, and if you refuse, you make your 
natural sourness altogether sourer through the 
vinegar and the gall of your opposition; weak- 
ness turns to stiff-neckedness and malice, and 
indolence, to spite and wickedness. But if, on 
the contrary, our old leaven is sweetened—if we 
admit the purifying influence of the Spirit, then 


120 





instead of wicked resistance we show honest re- 
pentance; instead of cherishing malice, we accept 
the truth in love. In the unleavened bread of 
sincerity and truth we celebrate our Easter by 
allowing ourselves to be reproved by the light 
(Eph. νυ. 18), and by giving honor to the truth. 
[F. W. Rosertson:—*Ye are unleavened.’ 
Here is the true conception of the Church: rege- 
nerated humanity—new life without the leaven of 
old evil. The Church visible and invisible, how- 
ever, to be distinguished; the former composed 
of the men who in this age or that profess Christ, 
the latter such as every Church is only poten- 
tially and conceivably, according to 108 1468, For 
want of keeping these distinct, two grand errors 
arise: 1. Undue severity towards the lapsed. 2. 
Wrong purism in the matter of association with 
the world, its people, its business, its amuse- 
ments. Under, 1. The attempt to make the 
Church entirely pure must ever fail. Only asa 
Church visible she must separate from her all 
visible evil; she must sever from herself all such 
foreign elements as bear unmistakable marks of 
their alien birth. Her purity must be visible 
purity, not ideal; representative, not perfect. 
Under, 2. We are not to go out of the world, but 
ouly to take care, in associating with sinners, not 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—————_————_— τ ΄Ὸ-ᾧἅὩἔ 


to recognize them as brothers, or as fulfilling in 
any degree the Christian idea]. 

[J. Epwarps :—Ver. 11. The Nature and End 
of Excommunication. I. The nature of excommu- 
nication: 1. Wherein it consists: a. It is pri- 
vative of the charity of the Church, of brotherly 
society with its members, of its fellowship, and 
of its internal privileges; ὃ. Positively it is a de- 
liverance unto the calamities to which those are 
subject who belong to the visible kingdom of the 
devil, and into the special power of Satan, who 
may be employed by God for the infliction of 
such chastisement as their apostacy deserves. 2. 
By whom inflicted: a. Primarily, by Christ; 6, 
Ministerially, by the Church. II. The proper 
subjects for excommunication. 1. Those visibly 
wicked by gross sin. 2. The obdurately impeni- 
tent. III. The ends of excommunication. 1. 
That the Church may be kept pure, and its ordi- 
nances undefiled. 2. That others may be deterred 
from wickedness. 8. That the guilty parties 
may be reclaimed. IV. Motives to the duty. 1. 
The honor of Jesus, and of His religion, and His 
Church. 2. Our own good. 8. The good of 
those who are without. 4. Benevolence towards 
offending brethren. 5, The absolute authority of 
Christ.] 


XL—A LACK OF PROPER CHURCH SPIRIT IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE CIVIL 


RELATIONS OF THE CHURCH-MEMBERS AMONG THEMSELVES. 


BEFORE HEATHEN TRIBUNALS. 


LITIGATION 


ςὡ 00 I Cum ὁ bo 


10 
11 


Cuapter VI. 1-11. 


Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to the law before the unjust, 
and not before the saints? Do [Or' do] ye not know that the saints shall judge the 
world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the 
smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more [to say 
nothing of] things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things 
pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I 
speak? to your shame. [58 it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not 
one‘ that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with 
brother, and that before the unbelievers. 
among you, [a loss to you'] because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not 
rather take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, 
[On the contrary, ἀλλά] ye do wrong, and defraud, and that® your brethren. [Or ἢ] 
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not 
deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor 
abusers of themselyes with mankind. Nor thieves, nor covetous,® nor [not, ve] 
drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall'® inherit the kingdom of God. An 
such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified 
in the name of the Lord Jesus," and by the Spirit of our God. 


1 Ver. 2.—The omission of 4 in the Rec. is feebly sustained. [A. B. 0, D. F. Cod. Sin. and several versions insert it.] 
2 Ver. 5.—Lachmann reads λαλῶ instead of λέγω after B. 
3 Ver. δ.--ἰ Ἔνι [according to B. C. L. Cod. Sin.]. Tho Rec. has ἔστιν which is less authorized (being found only in DB 


Ἐς though more commonly substituted]. 


Now therefore there is utterly a fault. 


CHAP. VI. 1-11. 


121 





4 Ver. 5.—Ov6dé εἷς probably genuine. [It is found in D.3 L. Syr. Vulg. and maintained by Wordsworth. The omission 


of it [in B. C. Cod. Sin.] is to be attributed to oversight, the transcriber passing directly from σοφός to ὃς. 


The οὐδείς or 


οὐδὲ els before σοφός are critical attempts to restore the text.] [The former is found in B. C. L. Cod. Sin. and the latter 


in F. 


] 
5 Ver. 7.—The Rec. has ἐν ὑμὶν. The ἐν was probably inserted to accord with the meaning: faulé, given to ἥττημα 


[A. B. C. Ὁ. L. Cod. Sin. all omit it and if is rejected by Meyer, Alf-, Words. Stanley, however, retains it.| 

6 Ver. 8.—The Rec. has ταῦτα, which is not by any means so well authorized as τοῦτο [which is found in A. B. C. Ὁ. 
Cod. Sin.] It was changed for the plural probably to conform to the two verbs preceding. 

7 Ver. 8.—The Rec. has the more common order βασιλείαν before θεοῦ. as in ver. 10. [The reverse order is found in 


A. B.C. D. Cod. Sin.] 


8 Ver. 10.—[The order of these two is reversed in D. L., a large number of the cursive MSS. and in the Greek fathers. 


πλεονέκται οὔτε κλεπται]. 


9 Ver. 10.—The Rec. with Lach. has οὔτε [according to B.D3L. But οὐ is found in A. C. Cod. Sin.] But the authori- 
ties for οὔτε have the same also before the following words. A.C. Cod. Sin. and the best critical edition, however, read οὐ 


there likewise.] 


10 Ver. 10.—The Rec. has ov before xAnpov. which was, perhaps, inserted in accordance with the same in ver. 9. 
11 Ver. 11.—The variations of ἡμῶν after κυρ. and of χριστοῦ after Ἰησοῦ are undoubtedly insertions. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[‘‘The connection of this paragraph with the 
preceding, seems to be, ‘As we have nothing to 
do with judging the heathen, so we ought not to 
go to law before them, or suffer them to judge 
us.’ This question was not new. It was held 
unlawful among the Jews for any Jew to bring 
a lawsuit against his countrymen before a Gen- 
tile judge, on the ground that in Ex: xxi. 1, it 
is commanded: ‘These are the judgments which 
thou shalt set before’—not the Gentiles, but 
‘them—the Jews.’ ‘If any one brings the 
judgments of Israel before the Gentiles, he pro- 
fanes the name of God, and honors the name of 
anidol. They who so do give occasion to the 
strangers to say, ‘See how harmonious they are 
who worship one God.’ This right of settling 
their own disputes, was conceded to them by the 
Romans; and hence the speech of Gallio to the 
Jews who attacked St. Paul. In the first begin- 
ning of Christianity, the same rule would be 
naturally held to apply. The existence of sepa- 
rate courts for the disputes of Christians among 
themselves, is implied [?] in this passage. The 
Apostolic Constitutions (II. 4, 5, 46, 47) and the 
Clementines, in language evidently founded upon 
this text, imply the existence of such courts at 
the time when those works were compiled, τ, 6., 
apparently about A. D. 150. When one of the 
parties was a heathen, then it was thought law- 
ful to prosecute before a heathen tribunal. 

Under these circumstances, it was natural that 
the same controversy, which in a mixed society 
of Jewish and Gentile Christians ran through so 
many other departments of human life, should be 
felt here also; and that the Gentile. Christians 
should still wish to carry on their litigations in 
the same courts to which they had been previously 
accustomed, and to indulge the same litigious 
spirit which hal characterized the Greek nation 
from the time of Aristophanes downward. But 
in whatever way this tendency originated, the 
Apostle [here] treats it altogether irrespectively 
of any Jewish or Gentile custom, and condemns 
it solely on the ground of the low views which it 
implied of the greatness of a Christian’s privi- 
leges, and the closeness of the bond of Christian 
brotherhood.” Sranuey. ] 

Vers. 1. Here also, as in chap. v., there is in- 
dicated a lack of true Christian spirit in the 
failure to maintain the honor of the Church. In 
the former case it arose from a want of moral 
earnestness, here from an earthly temper, and 
from stubboruness ef opinion. The tone of ad- 


dress is sharp.— Dare any of you.—This is 
not ironical, as Schrader imagines; but it is the 
direct outburst of indignation at the unworthy 
conduct. manifested [and also at the risk run]. 
‘‘The injured majesty of Christians,” says Ben- 
gel, ‘‘is here noted by a grand word.” Τολμᾷν, 
susiinere, to have the heart to do that from which 
a just sense of the Christian dignity should have 
restrained them. Here the culpable party must 
be regarded. as consisting mainly of Gentile con- 
verts, since it was already a custom among the 
Jews to choose their own umpires—having a 
matter.—IIpayya ἔχειν is a phrase denoting civil 
suits, especially in matters of money and pos- 
sessions.—against another—of course, a fel- 
low church-member—go to law,—xpivecta, to 
separate oneself, to part from, then to contend, to 
strive, also to debate, and that before a tribunal. 
“This love of litigation—a remnant of the old 
leaven which abounded among the traffickers of 
Corinth—must have derived abundant nourish- 
ment from the divisions existing in the Church.” 
BrssEr.—before—é7vi, as in Acts xxiii. 30— 
the unjust—rédv ἀδίκων. These are the 
heathen. Soin Matth. xxvi. 45, they are called 
ἁμαρτωλοΐ, sinners; while the Israclites, on the 
contrary, are termed δίκαιοι, just; Wisd. xviii. 
20; xvi. 17; xi. 15. The designation ‘unjust’ 
is employed to bring out more prominently the 
absurdity [and the peril] of seeking for justice in 
such a quarter. It exhibits those to whom it is 
applied as devoid of that true righteousness 
which is found alone in God’s kingdom, as with- 
holding from God His due, and therefore as un- 
qualified to administer justice among His people. 
On ἁγίων (=o0i ἔσω chap. v. 12) comp. i. 2.— 
[**Paul does not here condemn those who 
from necessity have a cause before unbelieving 
judges, as when a person is summoned to court; 
but those who of their own accord bring their 
brethren into this situation, and harass them, as 
it were, through means of unbelievers, while it 
is in their power to employ another remedy.” 
Cavin. ‘And besides the scandal of such a 
proceeding, as exposing their internal differences 
to the eyes of the heathen, there were certain 
formularies to be gone through in the heathen 
Law Courts, such as adjuration by heathen 
Deities, which would involve them in idolatrous 
practices.”” Worps. ] 

Ver. 2. He here goes on to show still further 
what an entire disregard of the true dignity of 
the Christian state was evinced in their conduct. 
—Or do ye not know.—tThe ‘or’ presents 
an alternative, suggesting some other cause for 
their conduct, viz., that of ignorance; and the 


122 





interrogative form used intimates that it was a 
culpable ignorance of an indubitable and plain 
truth. [‘* This question,” says Worps., ‘occurs 
no less than ¢en times in this Epistle, and only 
twice in all the rest. It was a very fit mode of 
remonstrance with those who vaunted themselves 
most on their knowledge.’’|—that the saints 
shall judge the world?—‘‘This is the only 
clear, direct enunciation we have of the truth 
here expressed, though it is in perfect harmony 
with conclusions elsewhere furnished.” Burger. 
The words imply more than an indirect partici- 
pation in the judgment of the world, such as is 
brought to view in Matth. xii. 41, where it is 
said: ‘*The men of Nineveh shall rise up in 
judgment against this generation,” eéc., viz., that 
in contrast with the conduct, or faith exhibited 
by them, the guilt of the world will be set forth 
in clearer light, [so Chrys. and most of the 
Greek fathers, Erasmus, Words.]. Nor is it 
meant that the saints will simply unite in assent- 
ing to the sentence pronounced by Christ as as- 
sessors on his judgment seat [Barnes, ef al.]; 
nor that they in some general way will be glori- 
fied with Him, [Schleus., Heyden., Barnes. ]. Still 
less do they refer to any future judicial func- 
tions, which saints are to possess in this world 
as its princes and rulers, [Lightfoot, Whitby]; 
nor to any peculiar ability to estimate the value 
of the world’s opinions and doings, [Mosh. Ro- 
sen. | (ii. 15, comp. ver. 3). And least of all are 
they to be interpreters of the church as the per- 
petual judge of the world, in so far as it carries 
the light which ever separates the darkness of 
the world from itself. (Cath.). But they refer to 
that reigning with Christ which is elsewhere pro- 
mised to the faithful, (Rom. viii. 17; 2 Tim. ii. 
12), and serve to define more exactly the import of 
the expression: ‘glorified with Him.’ What was 
said especially of the Apostles, that they should 
‘¢sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes 
of Israel” (Matth. xix. 28), is here extended, in 
general, to all the true followers of Christ—His 
royal people, in relation to that portion of the 
race which shall persist in its opposition to the 
Gospel, viz., the world. In short, Paul here as- 
serts the active participation by the saints in the 
judicial work of Christ, such as is ascribed to 
them in Dan. vii. 22: ‘‘Until the ancient of 
days came, and judgment was given to the saints 
of the Most High; and the time came that the 
saints possessed the kingdom.” [The same pre- 
diction reappears again in the Apocryphal Book, 
Wisdom III. 8: “They (the righteous) shall 
judge the nations, and have dominion over the 
people, and their Lord shall reign forever”’]; 
also Rev. ii. 26, 27; xx. 4-6. That this is the 
element in their glory which the Apostle alludes 
to, the context clearly shows. [Such is the in- 
terpretation also of Calvin, Beza, Alf., Stanley, 
and others. And it is plainly the only tenable 
one. The others are either too far fetched, or 
imply a more general acquaintance with the 
New Testament, in its present form, than could 
have been possible for the Corinthians; and we 
cannot suppose that the Apostle would be likely 
to consider their ignorance of the matters sug- 
gested a fit ground for rebuke. But the pro- 
phecy of Daniel was in their hands; and the an- 
ticipations of the final triumph and glory of the 


/ 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


es 


righteous during the reign of the Messiah, were 
current among believers; and the ignoring or 
over-looking of these matters might well have 
been reproved. In fact the final and complete 
supremacy of Christ’s kingdom was already as- 
sured in the very character of its head, and the 
former could not be disavowed without offence 
done to the latter. As to the character of the 
functions which the saints were to fulfil, opin- 
ions will vary according to the views adopted in 
respect to the nature of the millennial glory, and 
of the relation which the church will sustain to 
the world at thattime. But whatever these func- 
tions may be, the language which describes them 
plainly implies the exercise of an active supre- 
macy in the affairs of the world. That which 
saints are expected to do then, must, in some 
way, be analogous to the duties which the Apos- 
tle urges upon the church-members to discharge 
for themselves in the present age. For this rea- 
son the view of Hodge and Barnes and others, 
who suppose a reference in the text ‘to the fu- 
ture and final judgment” (with a somewhat un- 
certain allusion to Dan. vii. 22, as though the 
event pointed to here were the same as the other), 
must be set aside. On that occasion the saints 
appear only as the retinue of the Judge, and are 
nowhere represented as taking an active part in 
the trial. The idea of Barnes that the saints 
are to judge the world by simply ‘ encompassing 
the throne,’ and‘assenting to Christ’s judg- 
ment,’ and occupying “ἃ post of honor as IF 
they were associated with him in judgment,” 
hardly suits the style of the Apostle’s reasoning]. 
The natural conclusion from all this, viz., that 
persons destined to so lofty an office, ought also 
to be deemed worthy of passing judgment on the 
trifling matters of this life, is put in the form of 
a question, expressive of astonishment. This, 
as is often the case, is introduced with an ‘and.’ 
The question, however, is not thereby made de- 
pendent on the previous one, ‘Know ye not?’ 
but it stands by itselfi—And if among you 
the world is to be judged.—The judges are 
here conceived of as constituting one vast assem- 
bly, in the midst of which the adjudication pro- 
ceeds. The ἐν ὑμῖν is not precisely equiva- 
lent to: ‘through you,’ as in Acts xvii. 81; nor 


to: ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν, by you, though the sense is about 


the same; nor: ‘in you,’ ὦ. e, by your exam- 
ple; but properly: in the midst of you, and so; 
before you: (coram). [Winer 3 XL. VIIL, ete. 
‘‘Hence,” says Mryer, ‘it is evident that the 
saints themselves are to be the judges sitting in 
judgment. And ἐν is employed in view of the 
following κριτηρίων, since the Christians judging 
therein, are conceived of as one judicial con- 
course, for the sake of representing the idea 
more vividly’’]. The εἰ, if, in ei κρίνεται, 
as the context shows, is not meant to exhibit the 
judgment as at all problematical, but only states 
it as indubitably presupposed in what follows. 
The notion of futurity here retires into the back- 
ground.—Are ye unworthy of the smallest 
judgments ?—Kpuirjpia is a word used to denote 
both places or courts of trials, and also the trials 
themselves which are there held. Here it means 
the latter, and the whole clause is to be taken in 
an active sense, g. d., are ye unworthy of hold- 
ing trial in the smallest matters? [Many, like 


CHAP. VI. 1-11. 





de Wette, Olsh., Hodge, Words., understand by 
κριτήρια, the matters in trial, as better suited to 
the context, ver. 4, 7, but Meyer says that this 
is contrary to all usage]. The adjective here 
(ἐλαχίστων) refers to the matters brought to 
trial, and which are here designated as of the 
most trifling sort, having to do simply with the 
earthly ‘mine and thine,’ Luke xvi. 10. 

Ver. 3. Know ye not that we shall 
judge angels? to say nothing of things 
that pertain to this life?—([A still wider 
contrast.] But are there here two questions, or 
only one? or are we to take the second clause 
as acorollary? Since μήτιγε in the first instance 
means, not at all (Passow III. p. 230. [Ros. Gr. 
Lex.]), and then: yet much less, it would seem 
to indicate that there is also a second question 
here. The sense then would be: ‘Our judicial 
power, as ye ought to know, extends even be- 
yond, even unto celestial beings; should it not 
then be now first applied to terrestrial matters’? 
¢. e., how much more now ought it to be applied 
to these ?—In respect to the fact first alluded to, 
‘the judging of angels’, we must at the outset 
put aside every explanation, which makes the 
phrase expressive of something inferior to the 
work of judging the world, instead of something 
which is an advance upon it—whether this be 
done by taking ‘angels’ to mean church officers, 
or priests, or teachers distinguished for devilish 
cunning; and by supposing the judgment spoken 
of to be of a spiritual kind, as relating to the 
errors of these parties, or to be even a mere 
ability to judge, (Gal. i. 8). The only point in 
doubt is, whether angels in general are referred 
to, or merely good angels, or merely bad ones. 
Brsser says: ‘both classes; to the damnation 
of the bad, but on the good, to pronounce a judg- 
ment of blessing, since they will be united with 
us under one Head in Christ’. (Eph. i. 10). 
Since, however, the idea that good angels are 
meant, finds support only in that relation which 
they sustain to believers, hinted at in Heb. i. 14, 
and in the hypothetical expression found in Gal. 
i. 8, and inasmuch as good angels are repre- 
senied as furnishing a part of Christ’s retinue in 
judgment, and as acting the part of organs and 
witnesses of His judicial work, (Matt. xiii. 39, 
xvi, 2/, xxiv. 31,.xxvy..31, 2: Thess. i.:7, Rev. xx. 
1 ff.), we are constrained to adopt the explana- 
tion, which supposes evil angels to be referred 
to, as the only correct one. [So Chrys. and 
most of the Greek fathers, and Calvin and Beza, 
and Bengel, Poole, and most of commentators. 
Whitby, with the same reference understands 
the judgment to denote that expulsion of the 
devils from their dominion over the world by the 
power of the Gospel, of which our Saviour speaks 
in John xii. 81, and xvi.11. On the contrary, 
Meyer, Alf. and Hodge, following the usage of 
the N. T., where the word ayye4o, without any 
qualifying epithet always means good angels, 
interpret it so here. But they do not profess to 
explain how these are to be judged, or they give 
to the word, ‘judge’, a very comprehensive mean- 
ing, implying only superiority of a general sort. 
Billr., de Wette, Stanley, leave the matter unde- 
cided. See Pool and Whitby.] At the same 
time it must be said that the unqualified term 
‘angels’ indicates the superhuman nature of the 





123 





beings contemplated, and puts them in contrast 
with the world; [and ‘the argument will be not 
less conclusive in this way.” Catvin;] while 
the position they are in, so analogous to that of 
the world, marks them as standing in an abnor- 
mal relation to God, and implies that the judg- 
ment spoken of will be one of condemnation, the 
same as in ver. 2, and not one that merely de- 
cides upon honors and rewards.—Brorikd = 
things serviceable for this life (Luke viii. 43), 
which belong to bodily sustenance, and are there- 
fore of an earthly, temporal sort, as is every 
thing which forms a ground for suits respecting 
property, debts or inheritance. [‘*The Latin 
translation of this word by sxcularia, is probably 
one of the first instances of the use of that word, 
in its modern sense of ‘worldly’ as opposed to 
spiritual, instead of its ancient sense, ‘belonging 
to a cycle of a hundred years’; and from this has 
sprung the signification of the word ‘secular’ in 
modern European languages”. STranury]. 

Ver. 4. Secular trials indeed then. 
would ye have.—[Bwwrxa is repeated with 
emphasis, and so stands first, and] κριτήρια is to» 
be construed as in ver. 2, not as equivalent to. 
πράγματα, matters to be judged, for this rendering » 
is void of support. ἔχειν might denote in this. 
connection: to have on hand; or, to have a just 
comprehension of; consequently: to be in a comdi- - 
tion to manage (as in the phrases, ἔχειν επιστήμην,. 
τέχνας, τὴν ἰατρικήν, ete.), and this would fit. well 
with what precedes. The μέν, introducing a, 
clause correlative to the one following, might 
remain untranslated, and οὖν be rendered by, . 
then, accordingly, or by some word of transition, . 
which would indicate that the point mentioned 
has been established, and that the clause where 
it occurs also stands in inward connection with . 
some previous expression. Properly: ‘Have ye 
then indeed such trials? but ye by no means 
proceed in a manner suitable to this fact!’ This 
thought would then be expressed by a protasis ; 
and apodosis, of which the latter is to be re- 
garded as a question of astonishment at such . 
procedure. An interrogation similar to this we. 
have in Jno. x. 36 (comp. ver. 35), ‘‘how happens . 
it that ye do this?” But such an explanation . 
would necessitate our taking ἐάν as equivalent to - 
el, which could only be justified on the score of the - 
laxity of the later Greek in this respect, and pro- - 
vided another interpretation were inadmissible. 
But we may interpret the ἐὰν κριτήρια ἔχητε, of © 
the actual existence of such trials among them; , 
in which case ἐάν would mean, if, in case that, and | 
we should interpret the clause thus: ‘if now it 
should happen that trials, involving secular mat-- 
ters, are held among you,—those despised in| 
the church these do ye set up ?—~. 6. as: 
judges. By ‘the despised,’ he means the unjust. 
or theunbelievers, before spoken of, who, as such,. 
pass for nothing in the Church, and enjoy no con-. 
fidence or authority there. [‘‘ This translation,” 
Hodge says, ‘‘is generally preferred as best in 
keeping with the context,” and Wordsworth 
adopts it also. See, however, the note below]. 
But if any do not choose to construe it as a ques- 
tion of astonishment, it may be taken as a simple 
affirmation, stating once more what was actually 
occurring among them. [‘‘So in the main, Lu- 
ther, Calvin, Riickert, Olsh., de Wette, Neander, 


124 





and others]. 
particle. Yet the form of the question would in 
any case, be the more emphatic. The use of 
καϑίζετε is also a remarkable way of expressing 
an appeal to heathen judges on the part of Chris- 
tians, for it implies that such judges were for- 
mally set up in office by the Christians them- 
selves, when they could have had no hand in 
their appointment, and only seemed to do so by 
appealing to them for decision in cases over 
which they ought to have no adjudication.— 
Τούτους, these, an emphatic repetition of the 
persons alluded to [involving also contempt]. 
Others, objecting partly to the use of καϑίζειν 
in relation to heathen authorities, who are sup- 
posed to be already existing, and partly to the 
application of τοὺς εξουϑενημένους tothe 
heathen as unsuitable [and inconsistent with the 
respect which Paulinculcates toward heathen ma- 
gistrates], understand the latter to denote church 
members, and construe the whole in the Imp. as 
an injunction [of rather an ironical sort]: ‘If 
you must have trials, thoss least esteemed in the 
Church, these set up rather as judges.’ But in 
such a case the text ought to read: τοὺς ἐν τῇ 
ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐξουϑεν., and the word ‘rather,’ would 
be an arbitrary insertion. Thisinsertion would, 
however, be necessary, if we understood the 
Apostle to mean such persons as might be suit- 
able for the office in question, but who, for some 
reason, were of little repute. But, however this 
may be, still our first interpretation is favored 
by what follows.* 

Vers. 5, 6.—To your shame I speak.— 
Comp. on iv. 14. The expression applies, as in 
xv. 34, to what precedes; and what follows, in 
part, explains more fully how far that spoken of 
in ver. 4 is disgraceful to them, and, in part, re- 
peats emphatically the case as it stood.—So is 
there not among you not even one wise 
man.—tThe οὕτως is either climacteric, mean- 
ing: ‘so completely are ye wanting in wise men,’ 
which rendering does not well suit a strong ne- 
gatio.a [but is adopted by Chrys., Luther, Billr., 
Calvin, Alf., Olsh., Riickert]; or it is: ‘in this 
way,’ ‘under these circumstances,’ referring 
back to ver. 4: ‘seeing that ye set up those per- 





{* Yet the interpretation which Kling sets aside appears 
in all the six earlier English versions. WickuiF: “ Ordeyne 
ye the contemptible men that ben in the chirche to deme.” 
TYNDALE: “Take them which are despised in the congrega- 
cion, and make them judges.” Cranmer, the same. GENEVA: 
“Them which are least esteemed in the Churche, them I say 
set in judgment.” Ruems: “The contemptible in the 
Church set them to judge.” In like manner the Ree ver- 
sion. Conant adopts it also. 80, too, Syr. Vulg., most of the 
Greek Fathers, Calvin, Beza, Bengel, Hammond, Stanley, 
Alford. And certainly this interpretation is one which 
most readily suggests itself, being most in accordance with 
‘the tone of the Apostle’s expostulation, full of lofty irony, 
and with the order of the words with the designations 
used, and with the use of ἐὰν with the subj. (see Kihner, 
ὃ 339, 2 ii. b.), and with the natural sense of καθίζετε: set 
up. What Paul means to say is: that if they would 
have trials over such trivial matters (a thing which he 
supposes they would have, even though they ought not), 
‘they ought to set up judges accordingly, not those of 
highest character, whose destiny was hereafter to judge 
angels, but persons who were comparatively of no account. 
This would be dealing with their litigious spirit as it de- 
served. And if we consider the complaints of Augustine, 
which Calvin alludes to, in consequence of the necessity 
he was under of devoting so large a portion of his precious 
time to secular affairs, we should see what reason the 
Apostle had for advising that the Corinthians should choose 
those “ least esteemed” for this business). 


The οὖν would then be an ecbatic j 











THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





sons despised in the Church for judges.’ [Se 
Meyer. The rendering here must be determined 
by the view taken of the import of ver. 4. If 
that last advocated be the correct one, it would 
be more natural to understand οὕτως in the for- 
mer sense. King James’ translation places the 
stress of the interrogation here, deviating in 
this respect from the previous versions which 
translate it, ‘‘utterly,” “ αὖ all,’ and supposes 
an ellipsis: “415 it so that there is not?” ]. “Eve 
is for ἔνεστι, an adverbial use of the é without 
the copula—‘is there,’ ‘does there exist.’—Ov dé 
—elc, a strong expression, like non ullus, nemo 
unus, ‘not even one.’ Considering how wise 
they were in their own conceit, the question here 
is a very cutting one. At the same time it sug- 
gests a strong reason for their altering their 
conduct. By it he would urge them to the prac- 
tical exercise of their vaunted wisdom—a matter 
in which they sadly failed. Σοφός, skilful, expert 
in resources, experienced, discreet.—who shall be 
able—. e., when a cause comes up—to decide. 
dtaxpivat—to arbitrate in a formal manner— 
between his brother, ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ ἀ ὃ ελ- 
gov αὑτοῦ,--ἃἢἃ wise expression, where a 
person understanding himself to be meant, sup- 
plies in thought: ‘and a brother.’ Meyer re- 
gards the party distinctly mentioned as the com- 
plainant (the defendant he understood as a mat- 
ter of course, who is specified by way of dis- 
tinction, as the party in fault). Had the plural 
been used, the two litigants would then have been 
equally brought to view. In the use of the term 
‘brother,’ a rebuke is intended which is still 
further enlarged upon—but brother goeth to 
law with brother.—This is not a question, 
whether considered independently, or as continu- 
ing the previous one; but it is an affirmation 
full of severe reproof. [‘*’ AAAd, after a question, 
passes rapidly on to the other alternative, the 
particle, which negatives the question being 
supressed, g. d., ‘nay; but.’”? Ar.]. Kpiveraz, 
goeth to law, stands opposed to διακρίνειν, to arbi- 
trate. Then, by way of contrast with the ‘* wise 
man among you,” before whom they ought to 
have settled their difficulties, we have the sad 
opposite:—and that before unbelievers. 
—[‘‘and that,” a form of expression used when 
particular stress is to be laid on the circumstance 
indicated.” Honan]. 

Vers. 7, 8. Looking away now from the point 
last mentioned, ¢. e., going to law before unbe- 
lievers, he here passes to rebuke the entire prac- 
tice of litigation among Christians as in itself 
wrong.—indeed therefore — ἤδη μὲν οὖν. 
The μέν gives a peculiar prominence to the 
point to be mentioned as being the worst of all; 
οὖν is simply transitional and conjunctive; but 
ἤδη (see Passow II. 1826 ff.) is a determinative 
particle, which serves, in part, to strengthen the 
whole clause, and, in part, to call particular at- 
tention to certain thoughts about to be presented. 
—it is in any case a loss for you.—’OAwe. 
presents the aspect of the case generally, with- 
out reference to any peculiar, aggravating cir- 
cumstances, such as going to law ‘‘ before unbe- 
lievers.” [Stanley renders it: ‘certainly ] 
*Hrrnua. lit.: a falling short; it is used, partly, 
of failings and imperfections (hence the var. ἐν 
ὑμῖν), and, partly, of injuries, or damage, whe- 


CHAP. VI. 1-11. 


125 





ther it be in an ethical sense, as caused by the 
outbreak of sin and the violence of passion 
(comp. ἡττᾶσϑαι, 2 Pet. ii. 20; νικᾶσϑαι, Rom. 
xii. 21), or as some evil consequence upon these 
outbreaks. such as hinderance to our salvation, 
and to our participation iu God’s kingdom. It 
is here undoubtedly the iatter, and points to 
what is more fully stated in ver. 9. This is un- 
doubtedly the more correct interpretation, and 
it forms an implied contrast to any supposed 
temporal advantage they might gain by any legal 
process. [So Meyer, de Wette, Words., Alf, 
Hodge. But Calvin, Beng., Billr., Stanley, 
Riickert, Olsh., all prefer the meaning: ‘fault,’ 
‘imperfection,’ ‘weakness.’ And there is strong 
ground for their interpretation]. Neander: “ἃ 
backsliding of the Church, and sinking down 
from the high standard of pure Christian feeling.” 
ὑμῖν, Dative of interest—that ye have law- 
suits with yourselves. -- Κρίμα elsewhere 
means, judicial decision, sentence, also judgment. 
With this rendering the sense would be: ‘that it 
comes to this, that ye have legal decisions,’ etc. 
The same sense substantially is obtained if we 
adopt the meaning which attaches to κρίνεσϑαι, 
and which does not elsewhere appear, viz.: law- 
suits. [So Rob. Lez. sub. voce; but Alf. says: 
‘matters of dispute’]. Μεϑ' ἑαυτῶν: ‘with your- 
selves ;’ more expressive than ἀλλήλων: one ano- 
ther. [It suggests the unity of the Christian 
body, so in contrast with the segregated condi- 
tion of the world].—How Christians ought to 
conduct themselves in cases affecting the ‘mine 
and thine,’ he states in the more striking form of 
a question.— Why do ye not rather take in- 
justice? Why do ye not rather suffer 
yourselves to be defrauded ?—The verbs 
adtxetove—aroorepetove are both middle 
and to be rendered as above. They imply the 
suffering of a ‘loss.’ It is one, however, only 
in appearance, being a victory in fact (Osi.). 
Comp. Matth. v. 39 ff. What follows may be 
taken as a strong assertion, or as a question, 
which either stands independently, or is depend- 
ing still on ‘why,’ since the question ‘or do you 
not know,’ of ver. 9, has alsoits logical relations 
in the ‘why’ (so Meyer, ed.2). But the former 
construction, which makes the sentence direct 
and independent, would be more expressive, and 
it is supported by kai τοῦτο ἀδελῴους. 
The ἀλλά then will have its proper force.— 
But ye (ὑμεῖς., emphatic, ye Christians) do in- 
justice and defraud—([the same verbs as 
in the previous clause, but active transitive] and 
that brethren.—[‘‘This passage is remark- 
able as being founded on the spirit of Matth. v. 
40.” Srantey]. [On the nature of ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction maintained by the early Church in 


secular affairs, its relation to that of the State, 


and the evils resulting from it, see NEANDER’S 
Church History, Vol. 11., p. 1389 ff., Torrey’s Trans- 
lation]. 

Vers. 9, 10. Or know ye not.—The ques- 
tion presupposes a self-evident answer respect- 
ing the conduct spoken of. ‘Such proceedings 
should not have been allowed by you, a people 
whose hope takes hold on God’s kingdom, and 
who profess to be the children, and so the heirs 
of the Most High. ‘‘Or,” efc., 7. e., your conduct 
can only be explained on the supposition of such 











ignorance.’—that the unjust God’s king- 
dom shall not inherit ?—Here (ἄδικοι) the idea 
involved in ἀδικεῖν, to do injustice, must be kept 
in view, yet looking away from the point wherein 
they as members of the Church were especially 
guilty. The ‘unjust’ (‘‘a term used of the hea~ 
then in ver. 1, and here designedly brought in 
for the purpose of putting all who were unjust 
on a par with the heathen”? NEANvER) are pro- 
perly those among whom the practice of injus- 
tice has become habitual, who persist in wrong 
without repenting.—But here the word denotes 
the immoral generally, those who offend God 
and man by iniquities of every kind, such as are 
specified in the following context.—In reference 
to ‘God’s kingdom,’ see on iv. 20. Considered 
in its perfection, as the object of Christian hope, 
the kingdom of God is the blessed state, wherein 
the will of a holy, loving, all-restoring, beatific 
God is fully realized; or, in other words, a con- 
dition wherein men and angels are unitedly and 
perfectly controlled by the Divine will, lead a life 
of righteousness and peace, and together with 
this, possess the highest good which it is desira- 
ble for men to participate in. And this partici- 
pation is expressed by the word ‘inherit’ (xAypo- 
vouev). It is something that properly belongs 
to the believer as a child of God (Rom. viii. 17; 
Gal. iv. 7), and involves a gracious right and an 
enduring possession. The expression, meaning 
literally, to obtain by lot, and then, to receive as 
an inheritance, belongs to the language of the 
Theocracy, and is used in the Old Testament to 
denote the entrance into the promised land, and 
into the society of those who are governed by the 
will of God. And this was but the type or sha- 
dow (oxia) of the kingdom of God that was to be 
set up on a renovated earth (2 Pet. iii. 18; Matth. 
y. 5). (That the verb takes after it the Accusa- 
tive instead of the Genitive, belongs to the later 
Hellenic usage). The ‘not inheriting.’ implying 
an exclusion from the possession of the highest 
good, explains what is meant by κατακρίνεσϑαι 
and a7éAAvoa:r.—That all conduct, which con- 
travenes the justice of God, or the ordering of 
holy love, should cause a forfeiture of this inhe- 
ritance, lies in the very nature of the case. In 
the Corinthian Church, however, there appear 
to have been some light-minded people who 
sought to persuade themselves and others that 
God did not mean exactly what he said, that this 
inheritance could never be withheld from any 
who had joined the Church. [‘Such a divorce 
of morality from religion has been manifested in 
all ages, and under all forms of religion. The 
pagan, the Jew, the Mohammedan, the nominal 
Christian, have all been exact in the performance 
of religious services, while unrestrained in the 
indulgence of every evil passion. This arises 
from looking on religion as an outward service, 
and God as a being to be feared and propitiated, 
not loved and served.” Hopee]. Against all 
such false conceptions and vain words (Eph. v. 6), 
Paul here warns the Church with his oft-recur- 
ring—Be not deceived (xy. 33; Gal. vi. 7, 
etc. )—To this he appends a full catalogue of such 
immoralities as exclude from God’s kingdom :— 
neither fornicators.—This indicates the vice 
prevalent in Corinth, and points back to chap. v. 
To this he annexes, that wherewith fornication 


126 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





was closely connected in Heathendom, and which 
when practised by God’s people, was termed 
both ‘fornication’ and ‘adultery :’—nor idola- 
ters.—Then comes that inordinate indulgence 
of the sexual passion which violated alike the 
Divine ordinance of marriage, and the rights of 
the married parties:—nor adulterers.—The 
series of this class ends with the mention of that 
unnatural gratification of lust indicated in the 
words:—nor effeminate, nor Sodomites.— 
These express correlative ideas. The former 
denotes those who allowed themselves to be used 
as women (qui muliebria patiuntur); the latter, 
such as used the former in this unnatural way— 
a wide-spread vice in that period (comp. Wetstein 
on this passage, and on Rom. i. 27). Next fol- 
low classes of the ‘unjust,’ in the more restricted 
sense, such as violently seized upon others’ pos- 
sessions, or more indirectly sought for them:— 
nor thieves, nor covetous,—(comp. on y. 
10 ff.).—In like manner in regard to the fol- 
lowing—nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor 
extortioners.—The enumeration is not strictly 
logical, since those last mentioned would natu- 
rally come in after the ‘covetous.’ But drunk- 
ards and revilers naturally go together, since the 
vice of the latter commonly results from that of 
the former. After asserting solemnly that such 
—shall not inherit the kingdom of God,— 
he goes on to remind the Corinthians that for 
them these trials belonged to the past, and that 
indulgence in such vices was for them a back- 
sliding into their old heathenish state, which 
utterly contradicted their high Christian expe- 
rience. 

Ver. 11. And these things some (of you) 
were.—The neuter ταῦτα carries a contemptu- 
ous implication, g.d., ‘such a set,’ ‘such stuff’ 
(Meyer). Τινὲς: some, notall. What otherwise 
would be a too sweeping and severe imputation is 
thus limited inits application and softened intone. 
[Calvin and Hodge regard the τινὲς as redundant 
or as distributive, g. d., some were one thing and 
some another]. The simple ἦτε, or ὑμεῖς ἦτε, 
would imply too much, since all the Corinthian 
converts, without exception, had not been addicted 
to either one or all the immoralities specified ; 
yet, on the other hand, τινὲς ὑμῶν ἧτε would have 
implied too little. ‘It would bring the whole 
body prominently to notice, and intimate that, 
only a part would agree with the description.”’ 
OstanpER. The change which, however, had 
passed over them, is indicated by three expres- 
sions introduced with the emphatic repetition of 
‘but,’ designed to set forth the contrast more 
strongly.—_But ye were washed clean.— 
απελούσασ ὃ ε.--- ἀπό; off, all off, clean, inten- 
sive. This refers to their joining the Church 
in baptism. Comp. Titus iii. 5. In like manner 
Acts xxii. 16, where the verb is aor. mid., and 
signifies, baptize thyself, or, cause thyself to be bap- 
nized, not, ‘be baptized,’ as though it were pas- 
sive. And so the verb here is middle, and 
must be taken in a reflexive sense, though it is 
difficult to translate it thus in English]. The 
term ‘wash,’ points to the defilement incurred by 
the sins before spoken of, and to the purification 
effected through the forgiveness obtained in 
baptism, or the removal of guilt then pledged 


(Eph. v. 26). 
ing away of all that is sinful (Riickert), we cannot 
therefore take to be here meant: although re- 
pentance and faith are presupposed in baptism. 
In this washing of baptism, however, the cleans- 
ing through the blood of Christ (Rey. i. 5; 1Jno, 
i. 7) must be considered as included.-Ye sane- 
tified yourselves, ἡλεάσϑητε.-- 18, too, 
is middle. It cannot therefore be supposed to 


denote the inward, progressive sanctification ac- 


complished by the Spirit; but, as in i. 2, the act 


of personal consecration to God, of separation. 


from the world and translation into fellowship 
with God; yet this, not putatively, nor exter- 
nally merely, but as involving also some opera- 
tion of the Divine Spirit on the heart (comp. 
Titus iii. 5; 1 Pet. i. 2).—Ye were justified, 
édtxatavdnre.—tThis, in accordance with the 
usage of Paul and of the Bible generally, is to 
be construed, not after Augustine and the Coun- 
cil of Trent, as if it meant: ‘made righteous’ 
inwardly. This is contradicted by the aorist 
tense of the verb. But it implies an introduction 
into the state of the ‘just,’ admission to a parti- 
cipation in the salvation of God—to a place in 
His kingdom and a share in His blessings. This 
exhibits the positive side of God’s salvation (the 
removal of guilt being the negative side), and is 
the result of consecration to God. Hence it fitly 
concludes the series. All three taken together 
denote an entrance into the state of grace [‘‘and 
refer to the first conversion.” Srantey. The 
view given by Kling is substantially that of Cal- 
vin, Hodge, Alf., Words. But the words also 
carry a further implication in the way of con- 
trast. ‘ Having become thus, ye are not to defile 
and pollute yourselves afresh and incur renewed 
condemnation’].—in the name of the Lord 
Jesus and inthe Spirit of our God.—These 
qualifying phrases are by some referred to all 
three of the foregoing verbs, and by others to 
the last alone. Others still make a division, re- 
ferring the words, ‘in the name’ to ‘justified,’ 
or to this and ‘washed;’ but the words, ‘in the 
Spirit’? to ‘sanctified.’ These attempts are 8 
failure; although it is indeed true that the 
‘ washing’ and the ‘justification’ are grounded 
upon the name of Christ. Even as, on the other 
hand, sanctification comes through the Spirit. 
Again the reference of these phrases to all three 
of the verbs appears to be opposed by the sep- 
aration of the verbs effected by ‘ but,’ as well as 
by the unsuitableness of connecting the fact of 
the washing with the Spirit, since according to 
the rule (to which Acts iy. 7 is no exception) the 
reception of the Spirit is consequent on baptism 
(Meyer). But the first reason given cannot be 
decisive; and so far as the second goes, we find 
that in Titus iii, 5, the ‘ renewal of the spirit’ is 
connected directly with baptism, as epexegeti- 
cal of παλιγγενεσίας. And as the phrase ‘in the 
name of Christ,’ indicates the objective ground 
on which the washing rests, so does the phrase, 
‘in the Spirit,’ indicate the subjective ground 
of the same, that is, the principle which inwardly 
imparts and applies the absolution implied in the 
washing. On the name of Christ comp. on i. 2. 
The entire personality of Jesus, so far as it is 
made known to usin the work of redemption and 


(Acts xxii. 16). It is analogous to καϑαρίσας | indicated in the name, is the oljective ground 


The moral purification, by the do- 


αν 


‘+= 


CHAP. VI. 1-11. 


127 





both of the pardon granted in baptism and of 
our justification and sanctification, according to 
the sense of the terms above given. But the 
Spirit of God applies to each individual what is 
offered to us in that name. He brings it directly 
to our consciousness, insures and imparts it to 
us, and enables us to realize it all within our 
own hearts. [“ By the ἡμῶν: our, added to ‘God,’ 
he binds the Corinthians and himself together in 
the glorious blessings of the Gospel state, and 
mingles the oil of joy with the mourning which 
by his reproof he is reluctantly creating.” AL- 
FORD |. 

[Oss. This whole passage vi. 1-9, is memora- 
ble as laying the foundation for that ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction in civil affairs which in the lapse of 
centuries grew to such mighty proportions as to 
overshadow for a time the temporal sovereignty, 
and even threaten to subjugate it altogether. 
There are traces of the existence of church-courts 
for civil causes among Christians as early as the 
middle of the second century, and in the Apost. 
Const., II., 47, the rule for the regulation of their 
proceedings is laid down. Ordinarily, however, 
the bishop became the referee in such disputes, 
and his office as umpire contributed largely to 
the increase of his importance and authority, 
and also greatly endangered his spirituality. 
When the State became Christian, this jurisdic- 
tion was conferred by law, and made binding on 
all parties that appealed toit. The custom once 
established, gradually extended itself with the 
increase of ecclesiastical pretensions, and the 
decay of secular power, until the Church assumed 
the form of a political association, with a well 
defined system of ecclesiastical polity that divided 
the control with the State both over the laity and 
the clergy, even in temporal matters, and aimed 
steadily at exempting the latter in particular 
from all amenability to the State. The history 
of this wonderful and yet perverse development 
of authority from the positions laid down in the 
text, furnishes a most instructive commentary on 
its meaning, and shows us the necessity of cor- 
rectly interpreting it. 

The limitations by which the precept is beset 
are as follows: 1. The litigants must be both 
church-members. Redress from wrongs inflicted 
from without may be sought at civil tribunals 
when public justice seems to require it—Paul, e. 
5.» appealed to Cesar. 2. The causes, compa- 
ratively trivial; the minor matters of property, 
for example, in relation to which it were better 
that. covetousness be mortified by quietly enduring 
the wrong, than indulged by the enforcement of 
rights. 3. The tribunals, heathen, or of a hea- 
thenish kind. The case may be altered when 
the judges are Christians. Yet even under such 
circumstances litigation between ‘‘brethren”’ 
ought, if possible, to be avoided. 4. The nature 
of the adjudication, informal—that of umpires 
chosen for the purpose by the contestants, and 
not of regular church courts. Paul’s aim was to 
preserve the peace and spirituality of the Church 
by the avoidance of litigation, not to convert the 
Church into an arena for conflicts, and thus to 
secularize it. The Church was never constituted 
to be ““ἃ ruler and a divider’ among men. 65. 
The evil condemned is not the practice of going 
to law, as though this were wrong in itself, for 








the magistrate, too, is a ‘‘member of God for 
good,”’ but the litigious spirit so contrary to the 
Christian temper. There are instances when it 
would be a manifest sin not to seek justice. But 
in doing so, a Christian should take care to show 
that he was actuated, not by feelings of revenge, 
but by asupreme regard to law and order, and by 
a desire that eyen the wrong-doer may be recon- 
ciled to Him. ] 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. [The judicial function of the Saints in the age 
to come]. Those are mighty words, ‘the saints 
shall judge the world,” ‘‘we shall judge angels.” 
Through them we catch a glimpse into the mys- 
teries of the Heavenly kingdom, especially into 
the fundamental mystery of the creating and 
judging Word, and into the vital fellowship 
which believers have with their Lord, likewise 
also into the mystery of the future, when the in- 
ward life of the saints, which is now hid with 
Christ in glory, will be made manifest as a life 
of Divine power and holiness. Those of whom 
Christ said, “1 in them and they in me,” of 
whom it is grandly sung, 

“Devoid of strength they are guardians for all; 

Poor, yet they win, let the worst befall,”— 
who here on earth have shared with their Re- 
deemer in His sufferings and shame, these very 
ones will share with Him hereafter in the mani- 
festations of His glory. ‘*When Christ, who is 
their life, shall appear, exhibiting Himself as He 
really is, then will they also appear with Him as 
gods of earth, to the astonishment of the world. 
They will reign and flourish eternally, shining 
as stars in the firmament of God.” 

But by virtue of this union with Christ in 
glory, they become partners also in His judicial 
authority. Having been exempted from judg- 
ment through faith in their Lord, they will join 
with Him in executing judgment over all, whe- 
ther men or angels, who amid the exhibitions 
of Divine love and wisdom and power and righte- 
ousness have continued hostile to God’s truth, 
disregardful of His grace, contemptuous toward 
His salvation, and opposed to all the ways of His 
kingdom—hardening themselves evermore in 
their enmity, until past hope. And this judg- 
ment will be an act both of deepest insight,— 
piercing through to the very centre of the heart, 
and detecting there the inexcusableness of sin, 
and of highest moral power—exhibiting a righte- 
ousness full of decision and vigor—allowing of 
no further protests—exposing the fallacy of ex- 
cuses, and annihilating them all as false and 
untenable through the might of an all-enlighten- 
ing truth. 

And this power to discern and judge at that 
period, is a living principle imparted to Chris- 
tians now, through the indwelling life of Christ, 
and it unfolds itself onward unto perfection with 
the growth of their spiritual life, until it reaches 
its highest state of exercise in the future king- 
dom of glory. There is always implied in it a 
demonstration of the mind of Christ, as well in 
that pitying love which goes out after the lost, 
tracks them in their wanderings, and wisely 
and patiently applies the means of their restora- 
tion, as in that holiness which should keep them 


128 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


-------ςςςςςς-.------ eee .00€_CO OO ——$—$LLLLLL_— LS 


from all fellowship with sin, consecrate them 
entirely to God, and maintain them in the obedi- 
ence of faith amid manifold temptations from 
within and from without, in joy and sorrow, in 
honor and dishonor, in abundance and want, in 
health and sickness, even unto death; so that, as 
the instruments of Christ’s truth and love, they 
shall have done what they could towards awak- 
ening, convincing and converting those who still 
walk in darkness—thus proving themselves fit 
and warranted to act the part of judges with 
their Lord at the last. 

But as their authority is also to be exercised 
over the world of spirits, these too must in some 
way be regarded as coming under this saving in- 
fluence. For is not the blood of Christ’s cross 
said to be God’s means for reconciling all things 
unto Himself, whether they be things in earth or 
things in heaven? (Col. i. 20). And is not the 
manifold wisdom of God to be proclaimed by 
means of the Church, even unto principalities 
and powers in heavenly places? (Eph. iii. 10). 
Shall we then mistake if we imagine that even in 
the extra mundane sphere there are also fallen 
beings, yet capable of salvation; and that into 
this sphere, whence came temptation and ruin 
unto our race, there shall in return go forth 
blessed agencies of deliverance from this very 
race, according to the wonderful council of God, 
and by virtue of the advent of His Son, through 
whom every thing above and beneath has been 
created? This 15. indeed an operation which, 
like that of the operation of this spirit-world 
upon us, comes not within the direct conscious- 
ness of believers; yet this fact does not militate 
against its reality, and like much that is now 
concealed, it will be made known to believers, as 
they enter upon their heavenly state. And if it 
be true, this circumstance will the more qualify 
believers for sitting in judgment over those bad 
spirits who obstinately close themselves against 
all such gracious influences, and scorn the salva- 
tion offered in Christ. These are conjectures 
indeed, and they might be carried out still fur- 
ther into the consideration of the particular du- 
ties in which the departed saints might engage 
in the other world. But it will not do to reject 
them as idle dreams, since they are in accordance 
with the analogy of Scripture, and are supported 
by the essential connection which exists between 
the judgment, and prevenient efforts directed to 
the recovery of the fallen. 

Since the judicial work of the saints is not 
simply a corroboration of the sentence pro- 
nounced by Christ, but also an active participa- 
tion in the judgment carried on by Him, as the 
organs of His office, a training preparatory to this 
high function will naturally be required of 
them. To this there belongs—l, a learning to 
speak what is true and right, not only in public, 
but also in private stations, so that a readiness 
may be acquired in distinguishing between right 
and wrong, and there shall be no danger of being 
misled, either through the purblindness of the 
foolish, or by the corrupt sophistries and wretched 
infatuation of te self-opinionated and dogmatic 
(analogous wi.a Luke xvi. 10ff.; xix. 17 ff.); 2, 
a calm, self-denying willingness to accept justice 
as set forth in the sentence rendered, whether it 
come from a judge or an umpire; for here the 











rule holds good, that obedience to authority is 
the best qualification for exercising authority ; 
3, the still loftier self-denial shown in a readi- 
ness to suffer wrong rather than to gain aught by 
going to law at the expense of love and unity. 
On the other hand, the habit of over-reaching 
and defrauding, originating in a spirit of selfish 
greed, as it disqualifies for admission into God’s 
kingdom, so does it in an especial manner unfit 
a person to exercise judgment. And this is true 
also of every act which violates the rights either 
of God or man; for all such acts virtually disown 
and entirely neutralize that state of grace into 
which a person has been brought through the 
name of Christ and by the Spirit of God. The 
persons who practise them have washed and 
consecrated themselves, and been justified (in 
baptism) to no purpose. 

[2. Zhe natural condition of man, depraved and 
lost (vy. 9-11). When unchecked, the original 
sin of our constitution breaks out into the most 
flagrant vices and crimes, which reveal the in- 
herent corruption. The most refined Pagan ci- 
vilization has no power to restrain and cure it. 
Rather it serves to intensify the evil. The most 
demoralized society in the old world was to be 
found in the most refined of its cities. And the 
character, thus vitiated, forever excludes from 
a state of glory. Jt shall not inherit the king- 
dom of God. The strong negation here precludes 
all hope for such as possess it, and together with 
this puts the stamp of falsehood upon the figment 
of a universal salvation. No statement could be 
more explicit and conclusive]. 

[8. The change which fits the sinner for hea- 
ven is a radical one, wrought in Christ and 
through the Spirit, yet not independently of hu- 
man volition. ‘*Ye have washed yourselves 
clean, ye have sanctified yourselves, ye are jus- 
tified.” The filth of sin is voluntarily removed, 
From being his own, the person consetrates him- 
self to God, and becomes forgiven and reconciled 
to God through faith in the work of Christ, and 
by the influence of the Spirit. Thus old things 
pass away, and all things become new, under the 
operation of Divine grace, and through the con- 
sent of the individual. There is, therefore, in re- 
newal a voluntary assumption of the weightiest 
obligation to keep one’s self unspotted from th 
world]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[Litigation on the part of Christians—1, involves 
great risk, and betokensa corresponding ‘daring,’ 
for it isa seeking for justice before the avowedly 
unjust, ver. 1°; 2 isa repudiation of their pro- 
per society, and of the advantages its saintly 
character holds out, ver. 1»; 8, is derogatory to 
the dignity of the litigants themselves, who are, 
by their profession, destined to be hereafter 
judges of the world and of angels, ver. 2,3; 4, 
is an imputation upon the ability of their breth- 
ren to decide in the matters of lesser moment 
here, vv. 2,5; 5, should be superseded by the 
selection of umpires in the Church, and the small 
matters it involves treated as they deserve, 
ver.4; 6, isa disgrace to the Church and a cause 
of scandal, as it opens the faults of Christians 
to the observation and sneers of the world; 7, is 


CHAP. VI. 1-11. 


129 





contrary to the spirit of Christ, ‘‘who, when He 
was reviled, reviled not again, and when He suf- 
fered, threatened not, but committed Himself to 
Him that judgeth righteously,” ver. 7; 8, implies 
wrong doing on the part of Christians, provok- 
ing litigation by their conduct towards each 
other, ver. 8; 9, those who by their offences pro- 
voke litigation are in danger of losing their in- 
heritance in God’s kingdom and becoming out- 
casts with the vicious of every class, vy. 9, 10; 
10, the offences which cause it, and the spirit in 
which it is often done, are contrary to the change 
which believers profess to have passed through, 
wer. 11]. 

Srarke:—Venr. 1. It is not in itself wrong to 
seek justice before earthly tribunals, since goy- 
ernment, too, is a Divine ordinance, designed 
for protection and order; and Paul himself ap- 
pealed to unbelieving magistrates against the 
persecution of the Jews (Acts xxii. 25; xxv. 10). 
But in all law-suits let every one take care 
wherefore, and before whom, and how he liti- 
gates. Otherwise his action may prove both a 
disgrace and a sin.—Ver. 2. In the coming judg- 
ment of the sainis there is great comfort for 
those who have lost a righteous cause. Let cor- 
rupt judges mark well. Against whatsoever 
righteous ones they have declared unrighteous 
judgment, by these will they be righteously 
judged at the last day.—Ver. 3. To be associ- 
ated with Christin judgment is one of the loftiest 
honors promised to believers, 1 Pet. ii. 9; Rey. 
i.5,6; 111. 21. The dignity thus conferred 
should be displayed even in this life by the con- 
trol which they maintain not only over them- 
selves and the world, but also over the Devil, 
and so in their conquest over all their spiritual 
enemies. It should be shown also in the way 
they judge and condemn the world in and through 
their life and doctrine.—Ver. 4. Those who know 
and enjoy God ought to be held in higher esteem, 
and deemed more worthy of confidence, than 
those in whom such knowledge is wanting.— 
Ver. 6. Earthly goods are the means of separat- 
ing the most united, heavenly goods can unite 
the most hostile.—Ver. 7. Christians ought to 
hold temporal possessions of such small account 
that the prime question with them should not be 
whether they have, or have not; and they should 
be so affectionate toward each other, that in case 
of dissension ‘about ‘‘the mine and thine” the 
temporal good should seem so small and the 
brother so important, that ere they would dis- 
quiet their spirits by litigation, and unfit them- 
selves for religious duties, and cause offence to 
their neighbors, they would let the whole thing 
go and suffer the loss.—Ver. 8. (Hed.). 1f an in- 
telligent person is guilty of the wrong, then he 
commits the greater sin in putting the innocent 
person to so much cost and trouble with his lies ; 
if the wrong-doer is ignorant, then it is not 
right, 1, to pursue the most stringent course 
with him and practise no forbearance; 2, to go 
to law in envious, avaricious, or ugly temper; 3, 
besides, the thing does not pay.—Vyvy. 9, 10. Those 
who needlessly go to law are classed with thieves 
and licentious persons, efc., and ingur a like con- 
demnation. The world evidently judges very dif- 
ferent from the Holy Spirit. Nothing is more com- 
mon than to excuse sin because of its commonness. 








If all on this catalogue are lost, you can count 
the saved, almost all. Ye unrighteous litigants, 
fornicators, small and great thieves, sly and open 
thieves, be alarmed!—Ver. 11. (Hep.): ‘*Such 
were some,”’ eic., sweet word ‘were.’ To de and 
to be willing to remain such—that were the pity. 
Those who have escaped from the snares of the 
Devil should bear the past in mind continually, 
as a motive to avoid sin and foster gratitude. 

Berxien. Brs.:—Ver. 1. The reason why the 
righteous are often passed by, and the unrighte- 
ous are chosen as judges, is because people hope 
to make something out of the latter.—Ver. 2. 
Judicial honors hereafter await those only who 
have acted justly here, and allowed themselves 
to be judged.—Ver. 7. So completely does the 
Holy Spirit drive nature from her supposed 
rights, and subject it to patient suffering, yea, 
to death, that we are not at liberty to maintain 
our rights arbitrarily, but are bound, every- 
where and at all times, to have regard to the 
jewel of our peace, and see that it be neither 
injured nor destroyed.—Vy. 9-11. The unrighte- 
ous are all the unregenerate, 1 Jno. 111. 7; Jno. 
iii. 8. There are many kinds of sins. Hence, 
if thou seest another sin, point not thy finger at 
him. Perhaps thou art implicated in another sin 
more deeply than he is in this. Remembrance 
of the past ought to cause perpetual humilia- 
tion. To this end we ought to think of our old 
sins, but for other reasons we ought to forget 
them. <‘But,’”—‘‘but,”—‘but.” Othe impor- 
tance and the preciousness of the change. Gra- 
cious acts all go together, though they are dis- 
tinguishable. If we pray, ‘God be merciful to 
me a sinner,’ that implies, ‘create within me ἃ 
clean heart.’ What God hath joined let no man 
put asunder. Salvation comprises forgiveness, 
sanctification, redemption, and we can get it in 
no other way than through the name of Jesus 
and the power of the Holy Ghost. 

Reicer:—VeEnrs. 2, 3.—We must improve the 
glimpses here allowed into the grander future, in 
such a way, that even here, amid our small en- 
gagements, we may as far as possible be lifted 
into higher moods. Through selfishness, impa- 
tience, anger, greed, the complainant often in- 
curs as much guilt afterwards as the man has 
who injured him. 

Hevupner:—Ver. 1. Every true Christian 
ought to be asort of a justice of the peace.—Ver. 
8. It is very natural that the betrayed should 
judge the betrayer. From a presentiment of 
this springs the hatred of evil angels against 
Christians.—Ver. 5. The lack of wise men ina 
church is great disgrace.—Ver. 6. That justice 
should be enforced by the secular power between 
those who profess to be governed by law is also 
a disgrace. 

Bresser:—If we kept in mind what glory 
awaits us in the Church, it would prove a sad 
thing for us to strive with our brethren about 
mine and thine, andif we were drawn into strife 
then would the judges find in us peaceable peo- 
ple who respected the decision of the saints.— 
Vy. 7, 8. Paul says ‘‘ye.”” Mark then, a little 
leayen leavens the whole lump! The flagrant 
immoralities of some did not constrain the Church 
to mourning, did not move them to the exercise 
of discipline. A Christian Church, however, is 


180 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


not a mere aggregate of names, but it is the body 
of one Spirit, composed of many members. 
Hence the declaration of the Apostle, ‘‘ye do 
wrong,” struck at the whole Church, and stuck 
in it like an arrow until it acknowledged its own 
disgrace in bitter repentance.—Ver. 11. What- 
ever has been done for us and is to be found in 
the name of Jesus, that is appropriated to us 
through the Spirit of ow: God—that God, who is 
pe and highest Good in Jesus Christ our 

ord. 

[F. W. Roperrson:—Let us guard against a 
natural misconception of the Apostle’s meaning. 
You might think that he meant to say, that the 





7 


Corinthians should have ecclesiastical instead 
of civil courts; and for this reason, that church- 


men and clergy will decide rightly by a special © 


promise of guidance, and heathen and laymer 
wrongly. But this has not to do with the case. 
It is not a question here between ecclesiastical 
and civil courts, but between law and equity, 
between litigation and arbitration. The remedy 
[for offences] is, not more elaborate law, nor 
cheaper law, nor greater facility for law, but 
more Christianity, less loud cries about ‘ Rights,” 
more earnest anxiety on both and all sides to do 
no wrong]. 


XII.—AN EXHORTATION TO CHRISTIAN CONTINENCE, AND A PROHIBITION OF ALL 
HEATHENISH LICENTIOUSNESS. THE RELATION WHICH THE BODY SUSTAINS 
TO CHRIST; ITS CHARACTER AS THE DWELLING-PLACE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, 
AND THE GREAT PRICE PAID FOR ITS RANSOM, DO NOT ALLOW OF OUR RE- 
GARDING SUCH A GRATIFICATION OF CARNAL APPETITE MORALLY INDIFFE- 
RENT, LIKE THE ENJOYMENT OF FOOD. 


12 ΑἸΙ things are lawful unto me, [are in my power], but all things are not expedient; 


all things are lawful for me [are in my power], but I will not be brought under the 
13 power of any. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy 
both it and them. Now [But] the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and 
14 the Lord for the body. And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise? 
15 up us? by his own power. Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? 
shall I then take [away (pas)] the members of Christ, and make them the members 
16 ofaharlot? God forbid. What! [omit what, and read, Or*] know ye not that he which is 
17 joined toa harlot is one body? for, two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined 
18 unto the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is with- 
out the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. 
19 What! [omit what, and read, Or] know ye not that your body‘ is the temple of the 
20 Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For 


ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, [omit all that follows*], 


and in your spirit, which are God’s. 


1[Ver. 14.—The verb ἐξεγείρειν appears in different codices under three forms—present, future and aorist. Tischen- 
dorf prefers the future, after C. D.3 Τὶ, Cod. Sin. Syr. Copt. Meyer prefers the aorist, which is the most feebly sup- 
ported, found in Β. 672. (See Exegetical and Critical). Lachmann reads ἐξεγείρει from A. D1. It is best to take it as 
future. ; 

2 Vor. 14.—The Rec. has ὑμᾶς, which is feebly attested, and Meyer thinks an error from Rom. viii. 11. 

8 Ver. 16.—The Rec. and Lachmann [with all the critical editions] read 7 οὐκ according to A. B. C. F. Cod. Sin.] 

4 Ver. 19.—The Rec. and Lach. following good authorities [nearly all: A. B. C. D. F. K. Cod. Sin.] read τὸ σῶμα [ana 
so also Alf., Stanley, Hodge.] But this is perhaps a correction occasioned by the singular predicate ναός. 

5 The clause καὶ ἐν τῷ, elc., is an addition apparently with a view to make the exhortation complete. The most im- 
portant MSS. and other old and good authorities omit it [and so do Alf., Stanley, Words.] 


spirit of Greek Philosophy, pleaded, in behalf of 
fornication and of eating meats offered in sacri- 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 12. [‘After speaking of the sin of covet- 
ousness, which had produced litigiousness,—and 
having reminded the Corinthians of what privi- 
leges they had received, and what sins re- 
nounced,—he now proceeds to examine and con- 
fute an argument raised by some of the Gentile 
Christians at Corinth, who in the presumptuous 


fice to idols, that man is the measure of all things 
(πάντων μέτρον dvdpwroc),—a principle in which 
both the greatest schools of Greek Philosophy, 
with which St. Paul had disputed at Athens, 
agreed, though they applied it in different ways: 
and that all*the creatures were his, and that all 
things were lawful to him—a tenet which they 
imagined had received some countenance from 


CHAP. VI. 12-20. 





the Gospel itself, which promised to them uni- j 


versal liberty, and even universal dominion in 
Christ,-a doctrine which, when properly stated, 
and understood, with due conditions, is produc- 
tive of that genuine independence which is the 
best security for self-control, and had therefore 
been placed in its proper light by St. Paulin the 
earlier part of his Epistle (111. 21-23). This 
principle he here adopts with true oratorical skill, 
and proceeds to examine it, showing at once its 
truth and the falseness of its application by 
them.’ After Worps. ]. 

All things are in my power.—Paul here 
has in view that easy, tolerant view of fornica- 
tion which was so common among the heathen, 
and to which he has already repeatedly alluded 
(v. 1; vi. 9) This view was still further vindi- 
cated on the grounds of that Christian liberty 
which was supposed to countenance this gratifi- 
cation of a natural appetite as no less proper in 

“itself than the eating of food was to satiate hun- 
ger. But the words with which the discussion 
begins are not to be regarded as the objection of 
an opposer, here cited for the purpose of refuta- 
tion [Calvin and Barnes]. Had this been so, the 
fact would have been indicated by some formula 
like ἀλλ᾽ ἐρεῖς: but you say. They are rather 
the statement of a fundamental principle of 
Christianity, resting upon its own grounds, yet 
with a suitable limitation of its application to 
the actual life of a Christian (woz, 7. e., for me, 
as a Christian).* Accordingly we are not to in- 
terpret these, vv. 12; 13, as giving us a sort of 
dialogue maintained between some imaginary 
opponent and the Apostle (Pott). The context 
indeed shows that the fundamental principle here 
laid down was actually adduced in support of 
fornication; but there is no ground for sup- 
posing that the Corinthian converts generally 
advocated this practice on such a basis, or that 
they so argued in their letter to him. It were 
better to assume this only of a few individuals, 
and that the Apostle had been privily informed 
of the fact, as intimated in the case mentioned in 
chap. v. 1. Some suppose the maxim here to 
have a close reference to what just precedes in 
ver. 11, g. d., ‘I being now in a state of grace, 
and free from all Jewish restrictions, and all 
outward ordinances, and being no longer in 
bondage to an accusing conscience and to fear of 
sin, have right to the largest liberty.’ But such 
a connection is by no means probable, since the. 
verbs introduced by ‘but’ are chiefly designed 
to warn his readers against relapsing into their 
earlier immoralities. It were better to connect 
with ver. 9, and to suppose that out of the cata- 
logue of sins there mentioned, he selected the 
first, and referred to the efforts made for justify- 
ingit. Besser regards the phrase as one of Paul’s 
proverbs, [and Bengel says: ‘Paul often uses 
the first person to express those thoughts which 
have the force of maxims, especially in this Epis- 
tle, ver. 15; vii. 7; viii. 18; x. 238, 29, 30; xiv. 
117. The term ‘all things” must of course be 


[* It can hardly be supposed that Paul meant to lay any 
such stress on the word ‘me,’ as though he meant to assert 
a distinction between believers.and unbelievers in this re- 
spect, claiming a liberty for the former which did not be- 
long to the latter. This would lead to some pretty danger- 
ous inferences. | 


131 





limited to such as were indifferent (ἀδιάφορα), 
i. e., to such acts as were not in themselves 
wrong, but only under certain circumstances and 
connections seemed to conflict with Christian 
morality. ‘All things are lawful for me which 
may be lawful.”’ Bencen. [So also Hodge; but 
Words., well styles this explanation weak and 
tautological, and hardly justified by the original, 
and prefers Theodoret’s view: ‘“‘all things are in 
my power, by reason of my free will; but it is 
not expedient in all things to use this freedom, 
for in doing that which is sinful thou losest thy 
freedom.” But is it not plain, after all, that 
Paul here has in view not actions, but external 
objects, the things in the world which were all 
given for man’s use, and over which he held do- 
minion, and which, under the Christian dispen- 
sation, were all restored to him unrestricted by 
carnal ordinances? (The Syriac version evi- 
dently so takes it; Tyndale, on the contrary, 
renders ‘“‘I maye do all thinges: but I will be 
brought under no man’s power.” So Cranmer 
and the Geneva Bible). In this sense it may be 
said with the broadest scope ‘‘all things are in 
my power” (Ps. viii. 6; Heb. ii. 6-11). And to 
this the antinomian would add ‘and 1 have the 
right to use them.as I please, according to the 
cravings of my nature, and according as they 
contribute to my enjoyment.’ And it is upon 
this lawless inference that the Apostle proceeds 
to put limitations]. ‘‘The abrupt commence- 
ment of ver. 12 is perhaps to be accounted for on 
the supposition that it alludes toa passage in 
their Epistle to him, and the words before us 
might have been used there even in reference to 
things indifferent; but without the proper limi- 
tations which the Apostle here supplies.” Νὲ- 
ANDER. 

The first of these is—but all things are not 
expedient.—By this he means as in x. 238, not 
materially advantageous, but morally fitting and 
useful, especially, perhaps, in its bearing upon 
others. [It were better, however, to take the 
verb συμφέρει in its broadest acceptation and 
bearings—conduce to projit, whether to the per- 
son who uses them, or to others with whom he 
is connected, and whose welfare he is bound to 
consult. Every finite good has a special end, and 
must be wisely used with reference to that end, 
and not being absolute, is dependent on times 
and circumstances for the benefit it is to confer]. 
The second limitation is—but not will I be 
brought under bondage by any thing.— 
᾿Εξουσιασϑήσομαι and ἔξεστε are kindred words 
(the former being formed from ἐξουσία, which is 
derived from ἔξεστι), and they involve a parano- 
masia, which serves to bring out the contradic 
tion, caused by the misuse of liberty, in a more 
forcible light. [We give the play on the words 
in English thus: ‘All things are in my power, 
but I will not come under power to any thing’]. 
‘Not I”? is emphatic. It exhibits the moral 
self of the individual (not simply that of Paul, 
but of Christians generally), in sharp contrast 
with everything, which, if yielded to passion- 
ately, or enjoyed with an accusing conscience, 
or fondly clung to as indispensable, acquires a 
despotic control over us. [The lord must pre- 
serve his lordship, and take heed that he become 


not the slave of any thing which is properly 


182 


subject to him. Freedom must not commit sui- 
cide. The body was designed to be the organ 
of the Spirit for ruling over nature, not the 
organ of nature for ruling over the Spirit]. 
᾿Εξουσιάζειν, to be master of, and itis here put in 
the future to express the firm inward resolve not 
to be mastered by any thing. Τινός is neuter 
corresponding to πάντα. 

Vers. 13, 14. Meats for the belly and the 
belly for meats, efc.—Here we have a con- 
trast drawn between what is in itself indiffe- 
rent, and the view which cannot be brought 
under this category.* From the fact that a mu- 
tual relation has been established between meats 
and the belly by an ordinance of the Creator, the 
former being made to be received and digested 
by the latter, and the latter being formed to re- 
ceive the former, and from the fact that both are 
alike transient, being designed only for this pre- 
sent life, it followed, as a matter of course, that 
eating was a thing morally indifferent, and was 
allowable, in so far as it neither proved incon- 
venient, or brought a person under bondage. 
Very different, however, was it with the act of 
fornication, since the body, standing as it did in 
direct relations with the Lord, and having been 
received by Him into the fellowship of an im- 
mortal life, does not in such practices fulfil any 
Divine destination, [but is rather alienated from 
its proper functions, and degraded by them]. 
After the nominatives, ἐστίν is to be supplied. 
It is altogether needless to suppose that the 
meats here spoken of had any special connection 
with the altar-feasts that were so closely asso- 
ciated with licentious practices.+ By such a 
supposition the force of the argument is rather 
hindered than helped.—And God shall de- 
stroy both it and them.—Paul refers here 
to that great change which is to take place in 
the condition of mankind at the coming of 
Christ—a transformation which will preclude 
all need of physical nourishment, and dispense 
with the organs for its reception. Comp. xv. 44, 
51; and Matth. xxii. 30. In the words, ‘‘and 


{* But have we not here the evidence that in the “all 
things” Paul had reference not to actions, but to external 
objects? Out of these he selects one class, and shows what 
they were designed for, and how far they are good or expe- 
dient. But the like adaptation and utility and propriety 
he denies to exist in the indiscriminate use of woman, since 
the body of both was destined for higher uses, in the sexual 
relation, than mere enjoyment; and the purposes of God in 
reference to it, were violated by that use. The logic of the 
Apostle is obscured, if we consider him as having the action 
primarily in view. It proceeds wholly upon the rule of 
adaptation of things to ends]. 


{+ This is Neander’s view. He supposes that Paul “at first 
meant to speak only of partaking of meats offered to idols,” 
and “then was prowpted to leave the topic and speak 
against those excesses at Corinth of which he had not 
thought at first.” he topic thus left, he supposes to be re- 
sumed again at the beginning of chap viii., but approached 
from a different point; and after several digressions and ex- 
positions of it, to be taken up in the same form as here in 
chap. x. 23. This view, though at first seeming to involve 
the course of thought in needless intricacy, grows more 
plausible the more we meditate upon the logic of the whole 


section; and it is not surprising that Neander says that 
neither Billroth’s arguments, nor de Wette’s have sufficed 
to convince him of its erroneousness. The case had better 
be left without arguing to each person’s reflection—taking 
into account all the while the fact that here among the Co- 
rinthians there was probably the same connection between 
the eating of things offered to idols, and the sin of fornica- 


tion that we find afterwards spoken of in the heresy of the 
Nicolaitans, Rey. ii. 14, 15, and that consequently the two 
stood very closely associated in the Apostle’s mind.) 











THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





them,” we have the hint of a time that reaches 
far beyond the death of the individual—a time 
when the world and all things therein shall be 
burned up. [Comp. 2 Peter iii. 11.] 

In contrast with the foregoing, there is pre- 
sented to us, first, that truth in a negative form, 
the analogy of which to the eating of food it is 
the aim of the Apostle to dispute—But the 
body is not for fornication.—That is, forni- 
cation is not the natural function of a perishable 
organ, but it is the perversion to illegitimate 
uses of the entire body—that body which belongs 
to the Lord, and is with him, destined to an im- 
perishable life. And in this also there are two 
elements involved; 1, a connection with the 
Lord ;—but for the Lord.—And this relation 
is a mutual one, since the body is destined for the 
Lord, to be one of His members, and His exclusive~ 
possession; and on the other hand—the Lord 
is for the body,—to rule it, and to use it; yea, 
to appropriate and assimilate it to Himself; and, 
as others add, to nourish it with his life. (Comp. 
Jno. vi. 88, 58, and also ver. 15, μέλη). 2. The 
destination of the body to an immortal life, 
grounded on its connection with the Lord—a 
destination that stands in striking contrast with 
the destruction above alluded to, which awaits 
the purely material world.—And God both 
raised up the Lord, and will raise up us 
also by His strength.—This resurrection is 
an introduction into a life that is no more sub- 
ject to death. Comp. Rom. vi. 9ff. The cai— 
καί, both—and, binds the two clauses together. 
In the second clause, however, the reading is 
contested, and Meyer (ed. 2d) considers ἐξήγειρε, 
has raised, as the only right reading, although 
not so well attested. Paul, he says, never as- 
serts the ἐγείρειν and ἐξεγείρειν, that is, a resto- 
ration to life after death, of himself and of his 
cotemporaries (2 Cor. iv. 14 is to be understood 
spiritually); rather, in anticipation of the 
speedy advent of Christ, he was looking to be 
changed without dying (xv. 51f.; 1 Thess. iv. 
16 f.); so that if he had been speaking of the fu- 
ture, he would have been more likely to have 
used the word ζωοποιήσει, shall make alive, than 
ἐξεγειρεῖ, shall raise up. (Comp. xv. 22; Rom. 
viii. 11). He interprets the word, however, not 
of the spiritual resurrection, that is, the new 
birth, but as in Eph. ii. 6; Col. ii. 12 f., where 
Christ’s resurrection is spoken of as the fact in 
which that of the believer is already involved, 
although the connection first becomes realized 
at the second advent, through the actual resur- 
rection of the dead, and the transformation of 
the living. But if, according to this interpreta- 
tion, both these ideas can be considered as in- 
cluded in the verb in its past tense (ἐξήγειρε), 
why not assume the same in its future form? In 
so doing, we should abide by the reading best 
attested—a reading which puts the verb in the 
same tense with καταργήσει, shall destroy—and 
would construe the verb ἐξεγειρεὶ in its more 
comprehensive signification, as denoting the 
change which is to take place in the living, as 
well as in the dead. 2 Cor. iv. 14 might also be 
interpreted in the same manner. The distine- 
tive changes awaiting the quick and the dead, 
although elsewhere made prominent, did not re- 
quire to be alluded to here. (With this Meyer 


CHAP. VI. 12-20. 





in his 3d ed. also agrees). It is hardly allowa- 
ble to distinguish here between ἐγείρειν and 
ἐξεγείρειν (Bengel and Osiander), as though the 
former referred to the first fruits of the resur- 
rection in Christ, and the latter to the work con- 
summated at the end. The reason why he uses 
the word “‘ws,” instead of ‘our bodies,’ is that he 
had used the personal form just before, ‘in the 
Lord.’ The context, in this case, allows of no 
misapprehension. ‘‘ The body,” says OsIANDER, 
‘cis the vessel of our personality.” The clause, 
‘by his power,’ it were better to connect with 
the latter verb, if by ‘his’ we understand, not 
Christ’s, but God’s, which is to be preferred, as 
God is the subject of ‘shall raise.’ Comp. xv. 
88; Matth. xxii. 29; Eph. i. 19. Διά here ex- 
presses the internal instrumentality. 

Vers. 15-17. Know ye not that your 
bodies are the members of Christ ?—Here 
he amplifies what is said in ver. 13, and ‘“‘upon 
the ground there adduced of the immorality of 
fornication, he brings to their distinet conscious- 
ness the abominable character of the vice in 
question.” So Meyer rebuts Baur’s assertion, 
that Paul here makes a petitio principii. Else- 
where Christians themselves are called members 
of Christ’s body—the Church in its totality, the 
head of which is Christ. (Comp. xii. 27; Eph. v. 
30). But here their bodies are spoken of as es- 
sential parts (the vehicles) of his personality. 
And this, not so much on account of his incar- 
nation, and of His so sharing with us our na- 
ture, as on account of the indwelling of His Spi- 
rit (ver. 19). Whether the Apostle had in mind 
the figure of the marital relationship (comp. 2 
Cor. xi.2; Eph. v. 26f.; Rom. vii. 4) is less certain. 
The incongruity of making Christ the antithesis 
to a harlot (Meyer), would not stand in the way 
of our supposing this, since it makes no differ- 
ence whether the other party be male or female, 
for Paul is here speaking of the essential contra- 
diction which exists between a person’s belong- 
ing to Christ, and so holding vital fellowship 
with the Holy and Pure One, and his having in- 
tercourse with an individual who was addicted 
to impurity, such as a common prostitute—an 
intercourse which involved the surrender of the 
entire person to her. It was only the impure 
conscience of a heathen that could be blind to 
the immorality of such fornication. But to the 
Christian’s conscience this should be evident at 
once, and we should denounce it as a crime per- 
petrated against Christ—as an abominable viola- 
tion of his sacred rights. Hence the Apostle 
directly proceeds to ask—Shall I then take 
away the members of Christ, and make 
them the members of a harlot ?—Aipew 
means not simply, to take, but, to take away, to 
alienate from the proper owner. Οὖν, then, or, 
therefore, introduces the inference: ‘‘since this 
is so, I will not so far forget myself, as to,’ eic. 
Ποιήσω may be either, Aorist subj., as in xi. 22, 
meaning, should I; or, have I any right to make ; 
or it may be future, shall I make? The sense 
will be about the. same. [Jelf says that ‘the 
second and third persons of the Future often ex- 
press necessity or propriety, shall, must.” Gr. 
Gram. ἃ 4063]. This query he answers with 
an emphatic negative—u7 γένοιτο, let it 
never be,—an expression by which in Rom. 


138 


vi. 2, and elsewhere, he repels all unhallowed 
inferences and suggestions and declarations. 

In order to prove that fornication involves all 
he has stated, he next goes on to show the nature 
of the connection it effects between the parties 
concerned, and sets over against this, the nature 
of the union believers have with Christ, so that 
the utter incompatibility of the two may be the 
more clearly felt—Or know ye not;—g. d., 
‘or if this at least, appear doubtful to you, then 
it must be because of your ignorance’ (Meyer). 
that he who is joined to the harlot is 
one body 7---Κολλᾶσϑαι, to be most intimately 
joined with. In this connection it denotes the 
sexual union, which involves the most intimate 
conjunction of the physical powers of life. The 
consequence of such a ‘union is stated in a cita- 
tion from Gen. ii. 24, found also in Matth. xix. 51, 
and this he introduces as a Divine declaration.— 
For he saith—‘ He,’ 7. e. God, sinve Scripture 
is the oracle of God, even though communicated 
through human organs (comp. xv. 27; Eph. v. 
8; Heb. viii. 5). To suppose God to be the sub- 
ject is better than to supply either the words 
‘Scripture’ or ‘Spirit,’ though the meaning 
would still be the same. But most unsuitable of 
all would it be to construe it as impersonal: it is 
said._they two shall be into one flesh.— 
This, which was originally affirmed of the mar- 
riage union, is here applied to illicit intercourse, 
it being the same thing, physically considered. 
Secundum speciem nature non differunt (Thom. 
a.q.). And by this application of the statement 
he shows that the act in question is not a mere 
momentary enjoyment with which the whole af- 
fair is concluded, but that it involves a real union 
of the natural powers of life in one complex per- 
sonality. The term “ flesh” here denotes simply 
man’s physical nature, without the accessory 
idea of corruption. The words ‘they two” are 
not found in the Hebrew text. They occur in 
the LXX., and in all the quotations of this pas- 
sage, even in those of the Rabbis. (Is this in 
the interest of monogamy 3). ‘‘ Into,” εἰς, Hebr. 


4 even in classic Greek, implies a transition 
into a particular state [Jeur, Gr. Gram., 3 625, 
Obs. 4].—But he who is joined tothe Lord 
is one Spirit.—Here we have the contrast: 
κολλᾶσϑαι τῷ κυρίῳ, ἃ phrase which occurs also in 
Deut. x. 20; 2 Kings xviii. 6. As the result we 
have, not ‘one body,’ but ‘one spirit,’ denoting 
the element wherein this union takes place. But 
this unity is not a merely ideal one. It is one in 
essential reality, the indwelling of Christ in the 
believer, so that His Spirit and our spirit be- 
come one. Comp. xiv. 23. This clause stands 
independently. 

Vers. 18-20. The warning implied in what 
precedes is now expressly given, and, although 
clearly an inference, is introduced abruptly 
without any connecting particle—Flee forni- 
cation.—®etvyerte, flee—a striking expression. 
Anselm says, Alia vitia pugnando libido fugiendo~ 
vineitur. ‘Other vices are conquered by fight- 
ing, lust by flying.”” What follows substantiates 
this warning, by showing the characteristic pe- 
culiarity of that sin, which distinguishes it from 
every other. And this is exhibited antitheti- 


134 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


LE OLE Le ee 


cally.—Every sin which a man might 
commit—[6 ἐὰν ποιήση avi pwroc. The ἀν here 
belongs to the relative and not to the verb, 
and gives an indefiniteness to it, annexing the 
notion, ‘whatsoever it may be.’ Je.r, Gr. Gram. 
ἢ $29, 1].—is without the body.—But how 
can he say this, when drunkenness and such 
like vices also involve an injury t« the body, and 
indeed cannot be practised at al! outside of the 
bodily sphere? There have been several modes 
of answering this question. We may either sup- 
pose that the word ‘‘every” (πᾶν) is to be taken 
in a popular sense for ‘nearly all,’ which is 
arbitrary; or we may consider the whole 
clause hypothetical, g.d., ‘Although all other 
sins were without the body, yet this,’ etc. (Flatt) 
—which is inadmissible; others [Jerome, Ori- 
gen, Aug., Bengel, Words.] take it to mean that 
fornication pollutes the whole body as no other 
vice does,—but this is not stated in the words; 
and others still, that no vices sever the body of 
the Christian from that of Christ as this does 
(Fritzsche), a thought neither expressed in the 
text, nor consistent with the view of Paul in 
chap. ix. f.; Rom. viii. 9); others again take 
the idea to be, that no sin imparts to the flesh 
such tyranny over the spirit as fornication, an 
idea plainly foisted into the language of Paul; 
others suppose that drunkenness and gluttony 
are here included in with fornication [Mac- 
knight]—a supposition not sufficiently estab- 
lished by the fact that these vices are frequently 
associated together. We would rather say, that 
all other sins affect and injure only the transient, 
perishable organs of the body, or that they re- 
quire for their commission some means that are 
derived from without, and are foreign to the 
body.[‘* Drunkenness and gluttony, 6. g., are sins 
done im and by the body, and are sins by abuse 
of the body; but they are still introduced from 
without, sinful not in their act, but in their 
effect, which effect it is each man’s duty to 
foresee and avoid. But fornication is alienat- 
ing that body which is the Lord’s, and making it 
a harlots body—it is a sin against a man’s 
own body from its very nature, against the 
verity and nature of his body; not an effect on 
the body from participation of things without, 
but a contradiction of the truth of the body wrought 
within itself.” ALFoRD].—but he that com- 
mitteth fornication sins against his own 
body.—The scope of the argument is this: On 
the one hand the Apostle brings to view the fact 
that the fornicator by his sin surrenders his 
body to the harlot, and commingles his life with 
hers in such a manner that he loses the power to 
dispose of his body as he will, as it were yielding 
to another’s nature the right he has to himself, 
and so coming in bondage to that (analogously 
to chap. vii. 4); and on the other hand, he con- 
siders how the body of the Christian (who is the 
only one here contemplated) is desecrated by 
fornication as it can be desecrated by no other 
sin. In both these respects this vice is a sin 
against one’s own body in a preéminent sense. 
The truth, that the sin of πορνεύων εἰς τὸ ἴδιον 
σῶμα, fornicating against one’s own body, is 
chargeable upon Christians, the only persons 
with whom he has to do, he exhibits still more 


clearly by referring them to the well-known 
dignity which the body of the believer, as such, 
possessed.—_Or know ye not that your 
body is the temple of the Holy Ghost 
which isin you?—As in ver. 15 he ascribed 
to the bodies of believers what he elsewhere has 
predicated of believers themselves, so he does the 
same thing here in respect of their character as 
‘the temple of God.” This designation, before 
applied to the Church as a whole (iii. 16; also 2 
Cor. vi. 16), he here applies to the bodies of Chris- 
tians. Primarily, the Holy Spirit dwells in the 
“inward man,” in the πνεῦμα, or spirit; but 
the body is its vehicle, or tabernacle, and in- 
separable organ. If we adopt the reading τὸ σῶμα 
ὑμῶν, then it would mean: the body of each one 
of you. The same sense is yielded by the other 
reading, σώματα, bodies. To this thought, but 
especially to the clause—which ye have from 
God.—(aré, the same as in Jno. xv. 26), show- 
ing how dependent they were on him, he adds 
this further truth—and ye are not your 
own.—From this it followed that they had no 
power over themselves, or over their own bodies, 
and therefore could not properly dispose of them 
to another, or use them for the gratification of 
unhallowed lusts, but were bound to employ 
them only in executing the holy will of God. 
And how they came not to be their own, he 
proves by referring to their redemption—for 
ye were bought.—viz: for God, to be His pe- 
culiar possession (comp. Acts v. 9, and περι- 
ποιείσϑαι Acts xx. 28). The figure involved is 
that of a slave or body servant, over whom his 
master holds exclusive control. The purchase 
was from the servitude of sin, and from the curse 
of the law, and from the power of Satan (comp. 
Rom. vi. 17 ff.; Gal. iii. 18; Col. 1.18; Acts xxvi. 
18). And this purchase was—with a price— 
and this price was nothing less than Christ Him- 
self, His ‘‘ soul,” His ‘‘ blood” (see Matt. xx. 28; 
1 Pet. i. 18). Passing beyond the mere signifi- 
cance of the word, yet observing its import, we 
come to the important thought that it was a high 
price, and the purchase, dear. [To this Winer 
objects, LXIV. 5]. This expression occurs in 
viii. 28, but where, as in Acts xx. 28; Titus ii. 
14, Christ is represented ‘as the possessor. The 


practical inference from all this is—Now then 


glorify God in your body.—Aofdlew here 
denotes the exhibition of the Divine holiness (or 
of God’s sacred presence, as ina temple) through 
a chaste, modest deportment. ‘The praise is te 
be celebrated through deeds, as: ‘do all to the 
glory of God,’ x. 31; comp. also Jno. xxi. 19; xii, 
28; xiii. 81. Ἔν, in, to suit the figure of the 
temple, or, on, specifying that whereon the con- 
duct which is to glorify God should exhibit itself, 
A7 serves to make the exhortation more pressing. 
‘Act rightly, so that it shall be apparent to all 
that ye do it.’ See Passowl. p. 612. [Oss.: 
“ΤῸ is very remarkable how these verses contain 
the germ of three weighty sections of the Epistle 
about to follow, and doubtless in the Apostle’s 
mind when he wrote them: 1, the relation be- 
tween the sexes; 2, the question of meats offered 
to idols; 8, the doctrine of the resurrection of 
the body.” ALrorp]. 


CHAP. VI. 12-20. 


138 


———————— anna 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. [Christian liberty, its nature and limitations. 
1. Its nature. Through the redemption effected 
by Christ, the believer is restored to that supre- 
macy over the world, which Adam had forfeited, 
and has afree right and title to use it and all 
things in it according to his ability and pleasure. 
No longer is he fettered by the restrictions 
which the elder economy imposed. To him now 
‘‘eyery creature of God is good,” and he is at 
liberty to make all things in their way tributary 
to his interests. In the person of his Lord they 
are all ‘‘put under his feet,” and with his eman- 
cipation from the bondage of sin, and the resto- 
ration of his inward freedom, his lordship over 
himself, he is at the same time restored to his 
proper sovereignty over the external world, and 
qualified to maintain it. But 2.] This liberty 
has its limitations, [first, by the law of expe- 
diency; secondly, by the law of self-preserva- 
tion; and thirdly, by the law of duty. All 
things, 6. g., though in our power, do not prove 
in their use alike, and at all times equally, bene- 
ficial, either to ourselves or to others. Again, 
the use of some things in certain ways and de- 
grees, may destroy the liberty which claims the 
right touse them. And, finally, we must yield 
to God and man what properly belongs to each, 
robbing neither of their rights. The liberty of 
the Christian is therefore not an absolute, but ἃ 
restricted liberty.] Fundamentally, however, 
this restriction is a self-imposed restraint, an 
act of perfect freedom, nothing but the fulfilling 
of our appointed course im love. Though the 
Christian is made free through faith, free from 
all which the law imposed from without, and 
enforced by penalties, yet it does not follow from 
this that he is at liberty to assert his own sinful 
self-will in opposition to the revealed will of 
God. Rather this very freedom becomes the 
means of entirely cutting off all arbitrariness of 
conduct. For that faith, through which the be- 
liever has been liberated, is in fact an entrance 
into the very life of Christ. It implies such an 
apprehension of Christ, that the believer can 
say: ‘It is no more I that live, but Christ that 
liveth in me.’ But in taking Christ he takes into 
himself all that holy love of God which embraces 
both him and all his fellow-believers in one 
blessed union. Possessing this love, then, he 
comes to hate and shun everything which con- 
flicts with the Divine will, everything which 
either tends to interrupt his fellowship with his 
Lord, or acts prejudicially upon his neighbors 
and associates in the churches ; everything, also, 
which is calculated to weaken his power over 
the world, the flesh, and the devil, and bring 
him again under bondage. That alone he allows 
himself to use, in suitable modes and measures, 
which operates beneficially on himself and others, 
and advances the Gospel of Christ and promotes 
spiritual life, that alone which leaves his liberty 
perfect, and his mastery over self and the world 
undamaged. Thus does the truth and reality of 
our freedom rest in Christ, and prove to be no- 
thing less than love freely and intelligently seek- 
ing its own proper ends. 

{See this whole subject of man’s freedom and 
dominion discussed in Wuttke’s Handbuch der 


Christlichen Sittenlehre, I., p. 849, 403 f., 451 f. : 
‘‘Man may and can perfect his rule over nature 
only when he has fully subjected himself to be 
ruled by the holy author and Lord of nature.” ] 

2. The power to purify the souland keep one’s 
self from all manner of fornication and unclean- 
ness, is to be found in Christ alone. The simple 
sense of shame or of self-respect, or the mere 
dread of weakening or deranging our physical 
nature, is not sufficient of itself to counteract the 
strong temptation to this sin, and quell the might 
of this the strongest of our carnal passions. The 
enjoyment is instant and sensitive, the injury is 
remote, and perchance may never be felt; and 
so the weak will give way.—But in our fellow- 
ship with Christ, in the clear living conscious- 
ness of His presence, we haye the power to over~ 
come the very strongest of our carnal impulses, 
and to resist the most seductive enticements, 
While He dwells in us with His holy love, Ha 
becomes the quickening power which animates 
and controls our whole constitution. Through 
this love, which consented to suffer the bitterest 
of deaths for our sins, sinful lust is essentially 
slain, and the Christian resolves that he, with his 
body and its members, shall belong to none other 
than his Lord. His body he henceforth regards 
as a member of Christ, an organ of His holy life. 
No more can he prostitute it to the control of an- 
other, or become bound in vital union to a harlot. 
The remembrance of Christ’s presence within 
him causes him to shrink with horror from 
everything which might defile that which has 
become a sanctuary consecrated to His glory. 
Mindful of his being purchased to God at the 
cost of the precious blood of His Son, he feels 
the weight of the mighty obligation, and is 
neither able nor willing to use that body, which 
is now God’s property, for any other purpose 
than for his service and glory. Being now joined 
to Christ in one spirit, he resolves never more to 
hold carnal intercourse with any, apart from the 
Divine ordinance of marriage (which is to be 
consummated in the Lord, and for the Lord), or 
to be guilty of aught whereby the body, which 
is destined to partake of the imperishable life 
of Christ, shall be unfitted for the heavenly com- 
munion. 

[8. The true position and dignity of the body. In 
its doctrine concerning the body, Christianity 
avoids two opposite extremes. It neither dispa- 
rages it as worthless and contemptible, after the 
fashion of some ancient philosophers, and the 
Manicheans; nor doesi idolize it into an object 
of supreme regard and care, as the Epicureans, 
ancient and modern, do. Regarding it as essen- 
tial to the perfection of our humanity, and as a 
needful organ of the Spirit, Christianity gives 
the body likewise a share in Christ’s redemp- 
tion, and unites it to Him for sanctification 
here and for glorification hereafter. It thus 
makes it a member of Christ’s mystical body, 
to be controlled and regulated by His Spirit. At 
the same time it imparts to it the character of 
a Divine temple, and requires that we keep it 
from all defilement, and preserve it in a condi- 
tion suited for the service and worship of God. 
So far, therefore, from being at liberty to despise 
or abuse the body, or to set up its welfare and 
claims in antagonism with those of the Spirit, or 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ee 


to make our care for it a distinct, though even a 
subordinate interest, our obligations to Christ 
demand that we unite it with the soul in one ge- 
neral system of spiritual edification and culture, 
yield its members as instruments of righteous- 
ness, and glorify God in it no less than in the 
spirit]. 

[4. The Church is God’s purchased possession. 
He has redeemed it unto Himself by giving His 
own Son as a ransom for it, thereby delivering it 
from the tyranny of Satan and from the merited 
penalties of the law, to be His in love and devo- 
tion for evermore. ‘Not that His hold upon the 
persons thus ransomed had ever been lost by 
their sin. God’s property in man is absolute 
and inalienable, and His title to dispose of him 
according to His own pleasure and unto His 
glory remains unaffected, let man do what he 
may. But, if we may so speak, His right to 
love and favor them, and to treat them as His 
children, had been destroyed by the forfeit of 
sin, and instead thereof there rested on God the 
obligation to wrath and punishment. And this 
was the right which had been recovered by the 
purchase effected by the blood of Christ. Thus 
a new ground of dominion and rule has been 
laid, superadded to the former one, and with this 
a new mode of government devised, and new ob- 
ligations imposed on the parties redeemed. God 
as Father holds the Church not only by the right 
of creation, but also by the right of redemption. 
He enforces His claims to obedience by pointing 
to the blood of His Son, which was shed for us: 
and the strongest incentive to devotion and 
praise on the part of the believer, both here and 
in eternity, is—‘‘For Thou hast redeemed us 
unto God by Thy blood’’]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[1. In the exercise of his power and liberty a 
Christian is bound to consult not simply the 
scope of his own rights and privileges, but also, 
1, the bearing of his conduct upon, a. his own best 
interests, and ὁ. the interests of others, ver. 12; 
2, its effect upon his own spiritual freedom, ver. 
12; 8, the intrinsic fitness of things for their 
special ends, ver. 13; 4, the worth of objects as 
determined by their durability, ver. 18; 5, the 
rights and claims of others, both God and man, 
ver. 13; 6, the particular honor which God hath 
put upon the objects under our control, being 
careful not to desecgate what he hath taken into 
fellowship with Himself, vy. 14-17]. 

[2. The sin of fornication consists, 1, in its be- 
ing a violation of the Divine interest of the body, 
ver. 15; 2, in that it is an alienation from 
Shrist of what belongs to Him, and an appro- 
priation of it to another, vy. 15-17; 8, in that 
it is an abridgement of our own liberty, ver. 17; 
4, in that it brings a person into intimate con- 
nection and union with the vilest of characters ; 
5, in that it is preéminently a sin against the 
body, being committed in and through it, in the 
perverted use of the highest functions of physi- 
eu life, which were designed for the purpose of 
raising up a holy seed that should serve God; 6, 
in that it is sacrilegs, vv. 19, 20]. 

Luraer:—Ver. 19. A Christian may be com- 
pared with the tripartite temple of Solomon. 


His spirit is the Holy of holies, God’s dwelling 
amid the darkness of faith (he believes what he 
neither sees, nor feels, nor grasps); his soul is 
the Holy place, where are the seven lights of the 
golden candlesticks; his body is the forecourt, 
exposed to the general view, where every one 
can observe how he lives, and what he does. 
Deep within the heart is the consecration made 
which unites him to the Church; in the secret 
recesses within does the Holy Ghost affiance it- 
self to the, believing soul; but the nuptial song 
rings throughout the entire man, and he becomes 
a spiritual temple of the Lord; and in the fore- 
court stands the altar of burnt offerings, whereon 
we are to lay our bodies as living sacrifices unto 
God (Rom. xii. 1). 

SrarkeE :—Ver. 14. Our resurrection is founded 
upon the resurrection of Christ; and the thought 
of it should restrain us from all impurity; for 
although the impure also will rise again at the 
resurrection, yet it will not be to the glorification 
of their bodies.—Ver. 17. Christ and believers 
are united together in one mystical person ; but 
from such union lawful marriage does not hinder 
believers, [for if he marries aright, he marries 
“ἴῃ the Lord’”’]. Marriage is, in fact, a type of 
the heavenly wedlock (Hosea ii. 19; Keel. iv. 9; 
Eph. v. 30).—Ver. 18. Hepincer :—Fornication 
is the only sin which involves the whole body in 
disgrace, and so defiles it more than all other 
sins. Drunkenness and gluttony do not affect all 
the members of the body; neither are the meats 
and drinks, wherewith a person offends, mem- 
bers of the body. Other sins are committed 
against a neighbor’s body (murder), his goods 
(stealing), his honor (bearing false witness), but 
fornication is a sin against ourselves, with our 
own bodies. Ver. 19. The inward glory of be- 
lievers consists in this, that God Himself dwells 
in them and walks in them (Ps. cxxxii. 14). 
Ver. 20. The precious and imperishable ransom 
paid by Christ for the human race, deserves en- 
tire consecration of body and soul to His holy 
service. 

BERLINBURGER BisieE:—VeEr. 12. People are 
apt to inquire only whether a thing is allowable, 
but not whether it is fitting or obligatory. 
Christians are allowed greater privileges than 
many think, but they always take ‘hemselves into 
consideration. Christians are not blind; they 
see, indeed, that in Christ they are exalted above 
all things, but they bear in mind also how they 
are to use all things, and in their dove-like 
simplicity are as cunning as serpents. Freedom 
is a Divine endowment, but it cannot be pre- 
served without Divine art. We have power over 
creatures only in God, and Christians are the 
only kings. If thou art in bondage to nothing, 
then hast thou all power. Freedom is a Divine 
jewel, but it must remain freedom, and keep 
clear of all snares and entanglements. Man 
boasts, saying: “1 am lord of the creation.” 
Yes, but let it only be so in fact, and become not 
a slave over it. We may, indeed, assert of any 
thing that it is good; but how art thou? May 
it not be holding thee in bondage ?—Ver. 18. In 
this statement, ‘The Lord is for the body,’ we 
have a noble proof that Christ has verily given 
Himself to us. He, therefore, who now rightly 
honors his own body, is joined by the Lord unte 


} 


CHAP. VI. 12-20. 





Himself. He who sunders the bonds of the 
Divine order, abuses his own body. Originally 
the body was not intended for impurity, but now, 
and as it is now, it beguiles. It does not, how- 
ever, follow that I, like an ox, must yield to that 
which impels me.—Ver. 14. Can he who expects 
in faith this glorification of his body at the re- 
surrection, endanger his hope by impure lusts? 
—Ver. 15. Believers themselves are Christ’s 
members; therefore every thing which is theirs 
also belongs to Him. Universally is it true that 
if a Christian surrenders htmself to the world 
and to the creature, he withdraws himself from 
his Lord Jesus. He who sins takes that power 
which God has given him and offers it up to 
another.—Ver. 17. One Spirit. To will what 
God wills, this is to be a partaker of the Divine 
Nature. With God, being and willing are one 
and the same thing (St. Bernard). This union 
to Christ is learned and attained in the inmost 
depths of the soul alone. If we delight to be 
with Christ, let us then cleave to the Lord and 
not toa harlot. Let us walk with God and fol- 
low the Lamb whithersoever He goeth. Let us 
abide in God, so that heart, disposition, sense, 
and all our powers, shall enter into God and come 
out of their selfish isolation and false freedom, 
and be God’s possession. In this way doth God 
recover the man who has forsaken Him, and 
dwells in him as in His own temple—Ver. 18. 
This passage instructs us also how we may deliver 
ourselves. It is by avoiding opportunities; by 
not running into danger, and thinking ourselves 
strong; tearing ourselves loose and fleeing as 
Joseph did.—Ver. 19. A believer is not his own, 
but is the servant of God, who looks at and exe- 
cutes his Lord’s behests. Where cana greater 
happiness be enjoyed in this life, than in the 
feeling that we are entirely and altogether God’s? 
God, as it were, is under obligation to care for, 
and to protect those who belong to Him and are 
no more their own. Be then in no respect your 
own, in order that God may be entirely yours. 
—Ver. 20. Christ has purchased the whole man. 
Through His spotless offering we are enabled to 
sanctify the body. Originally man was the 
dwelling-place and peculiar possession of the 
Godhead, and after his fall he was purchased 
anew for the same purpose by the redemption of 
Christ so precious; therefore ought men to con- 
secrate themselves to God; and to this end should 
we purify ourselyes from all filthiness of the 
flesh and of the spirit. 2 Cor. vii. 1. 
Riecer:—Ver. 12. By our misuse of freedom 
we are, for the most part, brought into bondage. 
Freedom is a condition wherein I am able both to 
use and also to misuse objects with ease.—Ver. 
13. He who with every morsel he eats takes into 
himself something of that condemnation of death 
under which all things lie, will deem the pleasure 
to be enjoyed in eating as the least possible, and 
will be as little inclined to boast therein as a 
criminal would boast over his parting meal. 
Through the sense of shame imprinted by the 
finger of God upon the human heart, and by our 
longing after our primeval innocence, we are 
powerfully admonished to employ the power fur- 
nished by Christ’s grace, for the proper preser- 
vation of the bcdy and its members, and to bring 
them by means of it to the service of righteous- 





137 





ness and fruits of sanctification; and for this 
reason also to rejoice that the Lord also beiongs 
to the body, that the protection, love, and grace 
of God in Jesus Christ extends also over this, 
and works out its sanctification through His 
Spirit; yea, also its glorification at the resur- 
rection.—Ver. 14. The liberty of giving one’s 
body to fornication, and the hope of resurrection 
to life eternal, cannot co-exist in the heart. 
Those thorns choke this seed, and by the gross 
abuse of the body do we forfeit the enjoyment of 
the hidden manna, which is intended also for 
the nourishment of the bodies of the saints in 
eternal life.—Vv. 15, 16. Our bodies are Christ’s 
members, since from Christ, the Head, there 
flows down upon them also both life and plea- 
sure, and power to serve God and His righteous- 
ness, and also the control of His Spirit, together 
with the hope and desire of making manifest the 
mind of Christ also in our daily walk and con- 
versation. But when a person withdraws his 
members from their proper Lord and Head, and 
in this way interrupts that enjoyment which 
flows from such communion, and destreys his 
peace and joy in the Holy Ghost; and besides 
this becomes joined to a harlot or a debauchee ; 
then does such conduct bring with it such servi- 
tude of the whole man as compels a participation 
of all the other members likewise, or at least 
infects them with its own impurities, as if these 
were their own. What ought to happen accord- 
ing to God’s ordinance only in lawful marriage, 
this happens also through commerce with a har- 
lot; but it happens in such a way as to leave 
traces in the body and its members, which shall 
follow the guilty one even unto the resurrection 
of damnation.—Ver. 17. By idolizing the crea- 
ture and by the pleasure sought therein, man 
becomes carnal; by cleaving to the Creator he 
becomes spiritual.—Ver. 18. The deeper the fire 
of lust lies in any individual, and the more the ex- 
ample of others and the hope that it will remain 
concealed and unpunished and the excuses fur- 
nished for it by man’s wit, blow upon it to in- 
flame it, the more need have we of the faithful 
watchman’s alarm: ‘ Flee fornication.’’—Ver.19. 
A temple is consecrated to God and to His ser- 
vice; it is also decorated by God with many 
tokens of His grace. What a comfort then is it 
believingly to regard our body as built and fur- 
nished by God’s hand, bought by Christ’s blood, 
and consecrated in baptism to be a possession of 
God in Christ! Assaulted, indeed, and ‘alas! 
too often overcome through the jealousy of the 
Devil, by all manner of alien powers, yet rescued 
again by the might of grace, and made meet to 
be the dwelling-place of God’s Spirit! Ah, what 
a glorious thing it will be to carry a celestial 
body in which evil lusts no more dwell! 
Hevusner:—VER. 12. The doctrine of Chris- 
tian freedom cannot be more basely perverted 
than when employed to the gratification of fleshly 
lusts. The rule of its use is a consistent regard 
for self and for neighbor. The Christian should 
allow himself to be fettered by nothing. True 
freedom is to be bound by no lusts.—Ver. 13. 
God has given us the body for holy purposes, its 
members and powers are, as it were, an image 
of the Divine Creative Power. Everything in 
us should be consecrated to the service of Ged. 


1388 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ie a et aa aia aaa aA EE AT a ie ai TE Ei ππ πο 


The Lord has become also the Saviour of the body, 
in that He has freed it from eternal death, and 
has earned for it its resurrection.—Ver. 14. The 
resurrection of the body should awaken in us a 
certain respect for our body, constraining us to 
use it in a worthy manner.—Ver. 15. Every 
Christian is a member of Christ. This holy 
union strengthens the sense of shame at all im- 
purity.—Ver. 16, Fornication is union with a 
harlot, with something impure, therefore separa- 
tion from Christ. The man becomes that where- 
with he unites, by assimilation.—Ver. 18. For- 
nication is a direct sin against ourselves, for we 
desecrate our personality by it.—Ver. 19. The 
body inhabited by the Spirit of God should be 
used ina holy manner. Christianity sanctifies 
even our physical life.—Ver. 20. God has given 


work of redemption, alike in its precious foune 
dation and in its importance to us. 

Brsser:—Ver. 12. There is something great 
in the power of a Christian freeman, which Paul 
has 80 celebrated in word and deed; but no where 
does the devil build his little chapels more cun- 
ningly than right by the side of the temple of 
Christian liberty. 

Because Christians are in some respects yet 
carnal, and are in danger of being biased by the 
flesh (iii. 8), they always need the rule of the 
Holy Spirit to enable them to distinguish between 
what is spiritual and what is carnal. Ἰ 

Paul himself is an illustrious example of a 
noble independence of all external things. He 
knows how to abound and to suffer need, being 
careful for nothing and in everything giving 


thanks. 

Ver. 20. He who depends on the Lord knows 
the meaning of that declaration (Ps. Ixxxiv. 2), 
My flesh and my heart crieth out for the living God. 


His own Son as ἃ ransom for us. Meditation 
upon the greatness of His sufferings should fill 
us with gratitude. Earnestness in the work of 
sanctification flows from a living faith in the 


XIII.—INSTRUCTIONS IN REGARD TO MARRIAGE, 
A.*—The propriety of marriage, and the duties involved. 
Cuapter VII. 1-11. 


‘Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me:! Jé is good for a man not 
to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication [But on account of the forni- 
cations], let every man have his own [ἑαυτοῦ] wife, and let every woman have her own 
[ἴδώον] husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence [her due*] : 
and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own 
body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own 
body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other; except ἐξ be with consent for a 
time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and [om. fasting and*] prayer; and come 
[be] together again, that Satan tempt you not for [through, διὰ] your incontinency. 
6 But [ speak this by [as a, xara] permission, and not of [as a, xara] commandment. 
7 For [But, d2*] I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his 
8 proper gift of God, one® after this manner, and another® after that. I say therefore | 
9 
0 


a) 


δι Pw 


to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if 
they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. And 
unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart’ from 
her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her 
husband: and let not the husband put away Ais wife. 


1 Ver. 1.—Mor is stricken out by Tischendorf [Alf.] according to B. Ο. Cod. Sin., [but is retained by nearly all the criti- 
oal editions according to A. Ὁ, F. Κα. L. Syn.]). 

2 Ver. 2.—'OdecAjy according to by far the most weighty authorities [A. B. ©. D. F. Cod. Sin.1]. The Rec. has ὀφειλο- 
μένην εὔνοιαν, an old gloss {found in L. and the Syriac and certain fathers], and an incorrect one arising from a mistaken 
interpretation of the nature of the due spoken of; [or perhaps it was a Euphemism}. 





(*I have taken the liberty of altering Dr. Kling’s arrangement. He has treated this whole chapter connectedly, 
nnd divided the text into four subjects—vv. 1-7, 8-16, 17-24, 25-40—with captions accordingly. The divisions I have 
adopted seem wore natural, and I have treated them separately for convenience’ sake,—Tr.]. 


CHAP. VII. 1-11. 


— 





139 





3 Ver. ὅ.--- Τῇ νηστεία καὶ is an ascetic appendage, [not found in A. B.C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin. It appears in K. L. Cod. βίη 


in the syriac vers. and in some of the fathers]. 


4 Ver. 5.—The Rec. has συνέρχεσθε or συνέρχησθε---8, gloss. 


Cod. Sin.]. 


[The true reading is ἦτε, as found in A. B. CO. 1). F. 


5 Ver. 7. The Rec. has γάρ. This suits the sense, but is feebly supported. [It is found in B. D2 K. L. Cod. Sin. Syr; 


while δὲ is found in A. C. Ὁ. Ε΄. Cod. Sin.1]. 


6 Ver. 7.—The Rec. ὃς μὲν---ὃὡς δὲ, which belongs to the later Greek, o—o is better supported. : 
τ Ver. 10.---χωρισθῆναι (so A. Β. Ο. K. L. Cod. Sin.], Lachmann [whom Stanley generally fellows] reads χωρίζεσθας 


{found in A. Ὁ. F.}. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Here we enter upon the second portion of this 
Epistle. Having first treated of those evils in 
the Church which he had learned by report, he, 
from chap. vil. and onwards, proceeds to give 
his opinion on those topics in regard te which 
the Corinthians had questioned him in their let- 
ter. This letter being lost, we can only infer 
what these questions were from the nature of 
the answers given. One was in relation to the 
propriety of marriage, and the performance of 
the duties it involved. This topic he treats of 
first, since it was closely connected with his ear- 
nest warning against fernication (vi. 12 ff.); for 
not only did it embrace the subject of the sexual 
relations; but that very depreciation of mar- 
riage also, which had begun te prevail in the 
Church, under the supposition that it was a sin- 
ful connection, which ought to be avoided, and, 
if possible, broken up when formed, was to be 
regarded as a reaction against the abounding li- 
centiousness of the place. 

This undervaluation of marriage, however, is 
by no means to be attributed (as by Grotius) 
[ Whitby, A. Clark, Barnes] to the philosophic 
views current at that period;* since these af- 
fected not so much the morality of the thing, as 
the cares and dangers which belonged to the mar- 
riage institution. It were, better to infer here 
an inference—though only a subordinate one— 
of that aversion to marriage which was just then 
springing up (so Osiander). But whether, and 
how far this difference of sentiment was connected 
with the party divisions in the Church, is a mat- 
ter of doubt. Yet, if there were such a connec- 
tion, still we are neither to suppose, (with Gold- 
horn and others,) that it was with the Christ- 
ian party in particular, whose alleged theosophic, 
ascetic character is altogether problematical ; 
nor yet (with Schwegler) that it was with the 
Essenic Ebionite Christians, whose presence at 
Corinth cannot be certainly ascertained; nor 
yet with the Petrine party, who, rather in view 
of the example of their leader (ix. 5;. Matth. 
xiii. 14), and of the Jewish, Old Testament 
standpoint on the subject, must have held mar- 
riage in special honor. These questions must 
rather have originated with the Paulinists, 
who, through the precedent of their assumed 
leader, and by reason of such expressions of his 
as appear here, and were misunderstood by 








[* Menanper: “If a man consider marriage in a proper 
point of view, it is an evil; but then it is a necessary evil.’ 
M:tetLus Noumupicus: “If we could live unmarried, we 
should be saved from a great deal of trouble; but seeing 
that nature has so ordered it; that we cannot live very 
comfortably with wives, and without them cannot live 
at all, marriage should be adopted not for the sake of the 
short-lived pleasure it has, but rather for the perpetual 
safety.” But this was not the general opinion. From A. 
Clark]. 





them, might have been led into an inordinate 
admiration of celibacy and disparagement of 
marriage, in opposition both to heathen immo- 
ralities, and to Jewish sensualism in this re- 
spect. With what modesty and wisdom Paul 
handles his subject will appear as we proceed. 

[‘* The whole is written,” says Alford, ‘“‘under 
the strong impression of the near approach of” 
the end of the present state of things (vv. 29-. 
31), and as advising the Corinthians under cir-. 
cumstances in which persecution, and family: 
division for the Gospel’s sake might at any time- 
break up the relations of life. The preceptsand. 
recommendations of this chapter are therefore. 
to be weighed as those in viii. al., with reference: 
to change of circumstances; and the meaning of 
God’s Spirit in them with respect to the subse-. 
quent ages of the Church, to be sought by care-. 
Jul comparison and inference not rashly assumed: 
and misapplied. I may also premise that in 
hardly any portion of the Epistles has the hand. 
of correctors and interpolators been busier than. 
here. The absence of all ascetic tendency from. 
the Apostle’s advice, on the point where asceti- 
cism was busiest and most mischievous, was too. 
strong a testimony to be left in its original clear- 
ness.”’ 

Vers. 1, 2, Now concerning the things 
whereof ye wrote to me.—[‘ Hach of his re- 
plies is introduced by the preposition περί, as 
here.”’ Worps. ].—it is good.—There is here a 
Brachylogy, as in xi. 16; Rom. xi. 18. We 
might insert: ‘I say,’ or: ‘it is my opinion.’ 
[Some suppose that the Apostle is here taking 
up the language of the Epistle addressed to him 
and affirming it: ‘It is good, as you say, or- 
inquire.’ And this is very, possible, and may 
account for the use of the strong word καλόν. 
here. It is adopted concessively.] The ques- 
tion is, however, whether by, it the Apostle 
means to express the idea of suitableness, or 
allowableness, in consideration of the superior 
advantage of celibacy by reason of the religious 
opportunities it gave (comp. ver. 26); or whether. 
he here has in view the moral beauty of conti- 
nence. If we understand it relatively, then it 
cannot be inferred, as by Jerome, that the oppo- 
site is wrong, ‘‘malum est tangere;” and so the- 
value and dignity of marriage as set forth in the 
context, will remain unaffected. ‘This agrees. 
with the feeling in the previous chapter. Comp. 
below vy. 7, 8, 26, 84 (mid.), 35 (end), 40. 
‘Good,’ ὁ. e., becoming, suitable for liberty and 
exemption from the marriage due, ver. 3, and for 
entire power over oneself, ver. 4; [good, not in 
view of marriage as originally designed; for in 
that case it was not good for a man to be alone; 
but good in view of the evils which sin had 
engendered, and by which it had marred that 
which was designed to be one of man’s chief 
blessings]; though, on the other hand, the set 
of ‘touching,’ mentioned in ver. 1, is always ac- 


140 


companied with modesty among the chaste. 
{**Much ingenuity,” says Stanley, ‘has been 
employed by the advocates of celibacy in making 
this word (καλόν) mean ‘lofty’ or ‘noble,’ and 
by the advocates of marriage in depreciating it 
io mean ‘conyenient for existing circumstances.’ 
The obyious meaning is the true one. It is used 
as in Aristotle and the Greek moral writers ge- 
nerally) for ‘good,’ like ‘pulchrum’ in Latin, 
opposed to ‘turpe,’==aicypédv, ‘ bad ;’ and the only 
limitation to be put upon it is that supplied by 
the context.” It means, beautiful, praiseworthy, 
yet only under certain circumstances, and in 
view of the traits thus exhibited. And so all 
must admit it to be, as e. g., when practised by 
Paul. But not universally, for certainly he can- 
not be supposed to contradict intentionally what 
he says elsewhere of marriage, as ‘* honorable in 
411: or as a type of the union of the Church with 
Christ (Eph. v. 23-32); or as a thing, which to 
forbid was one of the signs of the great apos- 
tacy].—for a man;—’Avdpo7w does not 
stand precisely for ἀνδρί, although, of course, as 
the context shows, the man is here meant; 
elas that, as Meyer remarks, not merely in 

is sexual, but in his human capacity. Thus in 
its deeper reference it would include the other 
‘sex also.’ Atr.] —Not to touch a woman.— 
This phrase the author formerly understood, with 
Riickert, to denote continence in the marriage 
state. In which case, then, the words in ver. 2: 
‘to have his own wife,’ would mean sexual inter- 
course in the marriage state; and vy. 8-5 would 
only be a carrying out of the same idea; and, 
καλόν would be equivalent to ‘morally beauti- 
ful,’ in correspondence with the tender feeling 
implied. But, apart from all other grounds, 
‘both the whole context as wellas the usage of 
language (ἔχειν), leads me to abide by the com- 
mon interpretation, which takes the words to 
mean sexual connection in general (as in Gen, 
xx. 6; Prov. vi. 29) of which that occurring in 
marriage is one species. And this first comes to 
view prominently in ver. 2. [So Alf., Meyer, 
de Wette. And undoubtedly they are correct. 
But Hammond, Whitby, Henry, Hodge, Barnes 
and others, take the phrase as meaning marriage, 
directly and primarily, finding support in this 
from certain supposed classical analogies. But 
this is certainly a perplexing and needless limi- 
tation. Paul here evidently starts with a broad, 
and surely very credible proposition. ‘There is, 
he would say, ‘nothing wrong, as the Jews 
argued, but rather something very proper, nay, 
very honorable, in having nothing at all todo with 
women carnally,’ as there certainly was in Paul’s 
case, and in that of many others who for wise 
reasons have given themselves up to a life of 
chaste celibacy. ] 

In ver. 2 he presents to us in contrast with 
the ideal καλόν the real practical need.—But on 
account of [‘‘d:a with the Ace. indicates the 
ground (ratio), not the aim (not even here), and 
it is only by implication that the notion of design 
can be brought in. Fornications are the reason 
for which the injunction is given, in order thus 
to prevent them.” Winer, ᾧ XLIX. c.] forni- 
cations.—The plural points to the manifold and 
irregular sexual vices which prevailed in Corinth 
(Bengel: vagas libidines), in consequence of the 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— ay 


multitude of courtezans to be found there. Now 
to ward off the temptations thus offered to the 
unmarried, by the enjoyment of legitimate inter- 
course in the marriage state he says, —let 
every one have his own (ἑαυτοῦ) wife, 
and let every woman have her own 
(idcov) husband.—The ἑαυτοῦ and ἴδιον point 
to the established relation of the monogamy. 
[The contrast between τὴν ἑαυτοῦ χυναῖκα 
and τοὺ ἴδιον ἄνδρα is a difference of idiom 
which runs all through the New Testament. 
Ἴδιος is never used for yuv#, nor ἑαυτοῦ for ἀνήρ, 


in speaking of husband and wife; perhaps from’ 


the seeming inappropriateness of using ἑαυτοῦ, 
except in the relation when the one party is, as 
it were, the property of another; perhaps from 
the importance of pointing out that the husband 
is the natural adviser of the wife.” Sranuey. 
See Winer, 3 XXII.] 

[The Imp. ἐχέτω, let have, is not to be construed 
as permissive only, but it carries the force of a 
command [JELrF, Gr. Gram. ὃ 420, Obs.1: “The 
Imperative is used when something of decision 
or authority is wanted, so that the more civil 
form of the Optative would be out of place ’’], 
as is evident from the analogy of the subsequent 
imperatives, and from the reason by which it is 
sustained. But, if a command, then of course 
we must limit the ‘each one,’ both of man and 
woman, to such as have not the gift of conti- 
nence (comp. vv. 3, 7, 36, 87). Here then we 
have a view of marriage in its lower aspects and 
bearings, as a safeguard against incontinence. 
But this pedagogical or practical view of mar- 
riage, as meeting a contemplated necessity, by 
no means excludes the ideal view given in Eph. 
v. 29ff. For, as Neander says, ‘‘we must not 
overlook the fact that Paul is here not treating 
of marriage in general, but only in its relation to 
the condition of things at Corinth, where he 
feared the effect of moral prejudices concerning 
celibacy.” [Besides, it must be remembered 
that marital intercourse is not the same in kind 
with the illegitimate connection, but is refined 
and elevated by the pure love which binds the 
parties in life-long and absolute union for the 
very noblest ends, and of which it is the bodily 
expression. Hence the Apostleis here prescribing 
a veritable cure for the evil passion, and not 
simply allowing it indulgence within a certain 
sphere]. 

Vers. 3-5. In order that the direction given 
in ver. 2 may attain its purpose, he goes on to 
insist upon the full consummation of the marital 
relationship, being prompted to this perhaps by 
the representations made in the letter of the 
Church, of a tendency towards a false asceticism 
in this respect, or of the actual practice of it 
among them.—Let the husband render unto 
the wife her due, and likewise also the 
wife to her husband,—O¢evAjv cannot there- 
fore mean simply ὀφειλομένη εὔνοια, due benevo- 
lence, as the Rec. Text has it [which was either 
substituted as an expository gloss on the suppo- 
sition that ‘the due’ was one of affection merely, 
or as an euphemism], but it refers to the due of 
marriage, debitum tori. That marital intercourse 
should here be set forth as a matter of duty, be- 
longs to the higher ethical aspects of the case. 
[See Hanuess, Christ. Hihik. 352, A. a., WUTTER 


CHAP. VII. 1-11. 





Sittenlehre, 3 15, 3]. This he proceeds to estab- 
fish more fully in the next sentence, omitting to 
connect it with any causal particle (for).—The 
wife hath not power over her own body, 
but the husband; and likewise also the 
husband hath not power over his own 
body, but the wife.—Here he shows that it is 
implied in the very nature of marriage, that the 
granting or withholding be not at the caprice of 
either party, but that each possesses a legitimate 
claim upon the body of the other, and has a right 
to itsenjoyment. This is a reciprocity whereby 
alone marriage receives and maintains its mono- 
gamous character. The ellipsis at the close of 
each of these clauses is evident, and the nomi- 
natives must have their verbs supplied from 
what precedes. In the expression: the wife hath 
not power over her own, and: the husband hath 
not power over his own, Bengel detects an <‘‘ele- 
gant paradox.” [‘*The ground of this being 
another's, while they are their own, is to be found 
in the oneness of body in which the marriage 
state places them.” Axr.]. Itis to this ‘power’ 
that the next injunction refers: Defraud not 
one another. At any rate, it amounts to the 
same thing, whether we say, ‘of this power,’ or, 
‘of your body,’ or, ‘of the due.’ What he for- 
bids is the arbitrary refusal of intercourse when 
the other party desires it. Except it be, εἰ 
μή τι ἂν. [The ἂν belongs to τ. On the at- 
tachment of this particle to other than verbs, see 
Jelf, 2 430, Obs. a.]. There is here a limitation 
upon the above prohibition [which is elliptical 
in form; and, though it would naturally be sup- 
posed from the preceding verb, plainly implies 
a modification in meaning. Itis not ‘defraud- 
ing’ that he allows, but ‘abstaining,’ as is eyi- 
dent from the appended condition], that both 
parties are agreed upon it, so that the rights of 
both parties are preserved: from mutual 
agreement, ἐκ συμφώνου. But even then 
the arrangement must only be fora time, πρὸς 
καιρόν. This might indeed denote some par- 
ticular, suitable occasion that might occur, calling 
for such abstinence. But, according to later 
usage, it must be understood of some fixed defi- 
nite period [Jelf, 3 38, 2,5]. And this meaning 
is sustained by the purpose expressed, in its 
whole extent. First, he mentions religious exer- 
cises, for which they might wish to have time 
and rest.—that ye may give yourselves to 
prayer, — undisturbed by the excitements of 
this mighty passion. Such extraordinary and 
protracted devotional exercises were, in later 
times, enjoined for particular festival seasons, 
connected with fastings (hence the addition in 
the Rec. Text. of τῇ νηστείᾳ καὶ). And it is pos- 
sible that the beginnings of this custom are to be 
found in this period, though such seasons were 
evidently of a purely voluntary character. That 
indulgence in sexual intercourse did not comport 
with holy solemnities, was a point assumed alike 
in the Old Testament (Ex. xix. 15) and among 
pagan nations. [Yet, as Harless well says, 
Christliche Ethik, 3 44, ¢c., ‘‘we are not to sup- 
pose that the Apostle meant to say that such ab- 
stinence was a necessary condition to a spirit of 





({* “On these words was afterwards founded the practice 
of married persons living apart through the season of 
Lent.” SZANLEY.] 





141 





prayer in general, but only that it was a suitable 
and necessary result of these peculiar circum- 
stances in which the soul felt moved to special 
devotion toward God. To the Apostle who re- 
garded the Christian’s entire life as one continu- 
ous and perpetual prayer, it was impossible that 
such abstinence should appear as an absolute re- 
quisite to prayer, from the simple fact that he 
allowed of no enjoyment whatever which was not 
accompanied with prayer and thanksgiving,” 1 
Tim iv. 4].—And be together again.—This 
indicates euphemistically the resumption of ma- 
rital intercourse. ’Ezxi τὸ αὐτὸ, a constructio 
pregnans—‘come together and remain toge- 
ther.’ The dependence of ἦτε upon iva is 
somewhat remarkable; hence the reading ovvép- 
xeode (Imp.). It nevertheless rests on good 
grounds. 

The limitation of their abstinence to a defi- 
nite period, includes two objects, that they might 
have leisure for prayer, and might be united’ 
again. The reason for this is-—that Satan 
may not tempt you through your incon- 
tinency.—By this he means a betrayal into 
that against which marriage was designed to be 
a safeguard, viz., those fornications which were 
caused by incontinence. That such incontinence 
existed among them was to be inferred, not only 
from their peculiar circumstances, but also from 
the fact of their being married, which showed 
that they had not the gift of continence (comp. 
ver. 7). The betrayal through incontinence the 
Apostle ascribes to Satan. This is no mere form 
of speech, grounded on the supposition that all 
evil is to be attributed to Satan. Neither does 
it refer simply to seductions practised on them 
by the heathen, as though Satan were but an- 
other name for ‘heathen,’ the enemies of the 
Gospel. But it strictly accords with the whole 
doctrine of Scripture, and especially with Paul’s 
teachings, that there is such a hostile evil spirit 
existing, whose business it is to seduce the peo- 
ple of God, and who, on this account, is styled 
preéminently ‘‘the tempter” (ὁ πειράζων) (Matth. 
iv. 3; 1 Thess. iii. 5). But the act of temptation 
(πειράζειν), in so far as it proceeds from this 
spirit of evil, is virtually a putting to the proof, 
since it presupposes some impurity or moral 
weakness in the parties operated on; or implies 
the hope of some pernicious result to them, on 
the ground of some suspected vitiosity of temper. 
In any case, it aims to demonstrate their impu- 
rity and impiety, and to effect their fall, and so 
to bring shame upon God and Christ, and to 
cause scandal in the Church, and involve it in 
disgrace, and hinder its spread, and weaken it 
in inward power and extent (comp. Jobi. 2; 2 
Cor. ii. 11, ete.).—ILecpafery means, to entice, to 
sin, and that, too, with the intention of betray- 
ing (comp. Jas. . 13ff.; Gal. vi. 1; Rev. ii. 10; 
iii. 10). But to derive ἀκρασία from κεράννυμι, 
as though it meant not mingling, 7%. e., in sexual 
intercourse, is a philological fiction of Riickert’s 
[one, also, which Words. adopts], which is un- 
tenable, if for no other reason than this, that 
κεράννυμιε never appears as—=y/yvuue in this signi- 
fication. The subst. ἀκρασία from κεράννυμε de- 
notes bad mixture, such as that of insalubrious 
air. But the ἀκρασία of the text is that which 
comes from ἀκρατής and is—axpdreca, the oppo- 


142 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—_—_ re errr S353). ng 


site of ἐγκράτεια. [So Alford and Meyer. The 
latter takes the ‘your’ (ὑμῶν) as an emphatic 
allusion to the prevailing fault of the Corinthians. 
This Alford questions, but on hardly sufficient 
grounds. | 

Ver. 6. But this I speak as a permission, 
and not as a commandment. — [‘This’ 
ae): What? The thing is variously argued]. 

t refers neither to what follows in ver. 8 [as 
Rosen., Macknight] because of what intervenes 
in ver. 7; nor to ver. 2ff. [as Beza, Grotius, de 
Wette, Hodge], since the command there given, 
that each man have his own wife, etc., must in 
that case be taken concessively contrary to the 
direct obligation imposed in ver. 3; nor yet 
simply to the clause preceding: ‘‘and be together 
again,” [‘‘as the ascetics Orig., Tert., Jerome, 
Estius, and also Calvin, because this is but a 
subordinate member of the preceding sentence.” 
Axrorp:*‘‘and the sense thus given to the pas- 
sage is not consistent with the context” Hover]; 
but to ver. 5, as a whole [so Alford, Meyer, 
Barnes]. The limitation imposed in regard to 
defrauding one another, he would not have taken 
as a command, as though persons were under 
obligation to practise longer or shorter absti- 
nence by agreement. ‘By permission’ (κατὰ 
ovyyvounv)—=as an allowance or concession ‘to 
your weakness. [‘Not as a command,’ “A 
proof of St. Paul’s authority. He is empowered 
to give a precept (ἐπιταγῇ) or to bestow an in- 
dulgence” (συγγνώμη) Worps. ]. 

Ver. 7. I wish rather (δὲ) that all men 
were as also myself.—The reason why he 
does not wish to impose that restriction as a 
command, he here proceeds to state by pointing 
[to the different temperaments of individuals in 
respect to continence, ] primarily to his own pe- 
culiarity. [That continence is the particularity 
in his condition which he refers to is assumed 
by Chrysostom, and is most probable. So de 
Wette, Meyer, Barnes. But Words. understands 
it of his unmarried state.] The above construc- 
tion of the connection occasioned, no doubt, the 
reading γάρ; for, instead of dé; but it comports 
equally well with the latter (which is better at- 
tested), if, with Meyer, we interpret thus: ‘I do 
not say this by way of command. I rather wish 
that all men might have the gift of perfect conti- 
nence, as I myself have, so that marriage were 
unnecessary.’—To limit the expression ‘all men’ 
to Christians, is inadmissible. This comprehen- 
sive wish he utters in view of the near approach 
of Christ’s second coming, when humanity would 
be made like unto the angels, and all marrying 
and giving in marriage would cease. 

But each one has his own gift from 
God.—He here explains what he meant in ver. 
6, when he said, ‘by permission,’ stating, on the 
other hand (αλλά), what hindered the realization 
of his wish. It was individual peculiarities, 
God had not given to every one alike the ability 
to practise continence. But whether by the 
word ‘gift’ (χάρισμα) he means an endowment 
of nature, or of grace, may be doubted. In view 
of the words ‘all men’ in the previous clause we 
might infer that he intended the former; ἃ na- 
tural aptitude which existed as a Providential 
favor outside the sphere of redemption. But the 
uniform use of the word in this Epistle and in 








the New Testament generally inclines us to the 
opinion that it is the latter—a capacity granted 
by God within the Church, and therefore a pro. 
per gift of grace, grounded on an actual partici- 
pation in Christ’s redeeming power,—attached it 
may be, however, to a person’s original disposi- 
tion and temperament. Though the words ‘all 
men’ are indeed to be construed universally, yet 
the Apostle has here to do only with converts, and 
it is these that he has in his eye when he says, 
‘each one’ and ‘gift.’ As Bengel observes, 
‘‘that which in the natural man is a natural ha- 
bit, becomes in the saints a gift of grace.” The 
gift here is the entire habit of mind and body in 
the Christian, in so far, 6. g., a8 marriage or ce- 
libacy is better suited to him, along with the ac- 
tions suited to each state, according to God’s 
commandments. But ina state not voluntarily 
assumed, the assistance of grace is more secure 
to the godly.” Comp. the words in Math. xix. 
11: ‘*To whom it is given.”” The epithet idvov, 
his own, is further explained;—one, so, and 
another, so.—This can either be construed 
generally, or applied strictly to the two subjects 
in discussion, viz., to continence and celibacy, 


on the one hand, and to the marriage state, on 


the other. The context inclines to the stricter 
construction. In this case, the second ‘so’ 
would refer to the fitness of the Christian of the 
marriage state, for forming and governing the 
family life. ; 

Ver. 8-9. A special application of the fore- 
going in the way of advice.—I say then to 
the unmarried, and to widows,—x« ai ταῖς 
χήραις, especially to widows; [so the καὶ must 
be interpreted, for widows being also unmarried 
cannot be regarded as a separate class. |—These, 
therefore, must be regarded as the parties singled 
out to be particularly addressed; while by the 
term, unmarried, single persons of both sexes 
are meant. And the emphasis is not to be placed 
on the latter, as though Paul were passing here 
to the consideration of a new topic—from the 
married to the unmarried; but it rests upon ‘I 
say,’ [‘‘which is but a resumption of the “1 
say’ in ver. 6, and brings this advice under the 
same category as ver. 7.” Atrorp]. It is other- 
wise in ver. 10, as may be seen from the position 
of the words: it is good, καλον, as in ver. 1, 
for them, αὐτοῖς, masculine, if they should 
remain as I also am, 7: e¢., unmarried. We 
are not to infer from this that Paul was a wid- 
ower, as Clemens, Alex., Grotius [Luther, Ew- 
ald, Selden, Conybeare and Howson] suppose, 
for this is in no wise here intimated [so Alf., 
Meyer, Bengel and others. Words. leaves the 
case doubtful]. In view of his own gift (ver. 
7), however, he wishes this advice to be taken 
conditionally. Butif they are incontinent, 
let them marry. ’Eykparetew—eyKpary εἶναι, 
to be master of one’s self—especially as it regards 
the sexual passions; a word of the later Greek. 
For it is better to marry than to burn. 
Πυροῦσϑαι denotes the painful excitement of un- 
satisfied desire, which burns like a fire within, 
and inwardly overcomes the man, or at least 
disturbs and weakens the moral powers. Comp. 
Col. iii. 5; Sir. xxiii. 22-24, In saying ‘it is 
bettér,’ he intends no disparagement of marriage 
as being a lesser evil; but only contrasts a re- 


CHAP. VII. 1-11. 


143 





lation which, in this case, is morally allowable 
and sinless, with a state that is immoral, or at 
least troublesome to the moral life. ‘A second 
marriage among Christians is therefore not in 
itself unlawful; not a grievous transgression, as 
the Montanists and Novatians asserted; never- 
theless the Church has always regarded second 
marriages with dislike, if only because the sin- 
gle marriage corresponds better with the idea of 
true Christian wedlock, which is a type of the 
union of Christ with His Church.” Brsprne]. 
{Bisping, it must be remembered, is a Roman- 
ist]. 

Vers. 10,11. And to the married.—This 
is connected directly to the foregoing, meaning 
those who are enjoined to marry—hence, to 
Christians. To limit this to such as were newly 
married, or to some particular parties had in 
mind (Riickert), is warranted neither by the ex- 
pression itself, nor by the context.—I com- 
mand; rapayyéAdw.—Here comes in the 
émitayn of ver. 6. It implies a stringent order, 
an injunction to do something (comp. Luke v. 
14) 1 Tim. vi. 13. And this he exhibits as a 
command of the Lord Himself, ὦ e., of Christ, 
the Head of the Church.—not I, but the 
Lord.—Here he has in mind the words of 
Christ in Matth. v. 82; xix. 4; Mark x. 12, 
communicated to him by a reliable tradition. 
To suppose that he had received a special reve- 
lation on the subject, is altogether gratuitous. 
[Nor are we to imagine that Paul here intends to 
draw a contrast between what he himself com- 
mands and what the Lord had commanded, as to 
the degree of authority involved in each. For 
as he himself states in ver. 40, ‘He had the mind 
of Christ ;’ and what is spoken under the inspi- 
ration of the Spirit, is no less valid than that 
which proceeded from the lips of Jesus. And 
what he intends here is not to draw a contrast, 
but merely to assert the distinction just alluded 
to. ‘He is simply telling the Corinthians, that, 
so far as what he was about to say was concerned, 
they had no need to come to him to learn it.’ He 
was merely repeating what had already been 
enjoined by Christ Himself.*] The exception 
‘‘except it be for fornication,” which does not 
appear in Luke xvi. 18, nor in Mark, is here 
dropped out, either because the tradition which 
came to him did not have the words, or because 
an instance of this sort had not occurred in 
Corinth (comp., however, v. 1), or because the 
matter was self-evident, fornication being itself 
a dissolution of the marriage bond.—that the 
wife.—The prominence given to the wife is not 
to be explained by supposing any reference to 
some existing case; but it may be accounted for 
on the ground of the greater inclination of the 
wife to obtain divorce; since she, as the weaker 
party, was more liable to suffer oppression, or 
was more naturally disposed to asceticism.—do 
not separate herself from her husband.— 
[‘‘Xwpiodjva, the natural expression for the 
wife as not having power to dismiss her husband; 
ἀφιέναι, the milder form for the husband (see last 
clause), although it is in ver. 13 used also for the 
wife. The words are taken from the phraseo- 
logy of legal divorce; but the cases here spoken 





[ See this point discussed by Witi1am Lee: The Inspi- 
ragsilecl Scripture, Sect. 4, Am. Ed. p. 272, and TowNsEND, 








of are not so much regular divorces as accidental 
separations.” SranLEy].—but and if she 
should be separated —This and the depen- 
dent clauses are a parenthesis, so that what fol- 
lows is in direct connection with what precedes. 
The words ἐὰν dé καὶ χδρισϑῇ point to 
some possible case of divorce occurring hereafter 
contrary to the command of Christ, and not to 
any supposed actual separation which might 
have taken place before the latter should have 
reached them. The καὶ does not belong to the 
whole clause, making it equivalent to ‘even if,’ 
etc., but simply to the verb, and may be trans- 
lated by ‘actually,’ or ‘in fact.’ [‘*This is not 
intended as an exception to the law, but it con- 
templates a case which may occur in spite of the 
law.—There are cases undoubtedly which justify 
& woman in ieaving her husband, which do not 
justify divorce.”” Hopgr.]—On the injunction— 
let her remain unmarried —See Matth. x. 
12.—or let her be reconciled to her hus- 
band.—The verb καταλλαγήτω had best be 
taken like χωρισϑῇ in a reflexive sense, ‘re- 
concile herself.’ This does not, however, exclude 
the mediation of others. He means that she 
should do her part towards becoming united to 
her husband, to secure his love and devote to 
him her love again.—The injunction on the man 
is very short—And that the man put not 
away his wife.—From the similarity of in- 
struction given to both, we may infer that what 
was said to the woman in vy. 10 and 11, ap- 
plied also to the man (Osiander). 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Marriage, its nature and obligations. In the 
Apostle’s view, marriage is a vital and life-long 
communion between man and woman, involving 
an equality of claims on the part of both. Asa 
living fellowship, it extends over the entire per- 
sonality, embracing also our physical nature. 
And this is precisely the peculiarity of marriage, 
distinguishing it from all other kinds of friendly 
connexion. While it involves the element of 
friendship—as a union of hearts mutually com- 
pleting each other—it has, likewise, besides this, 
a mutually supplementing bodily union, wz., the 
sexual. This has, indeed, its psychical side; 
yet it comes to its full expression and consum- 
mation in the bodily life. Both are in this re- 
spect adjusted to each other, and each party 
needs the other for the proper fulfilment of its 
position in the sexual relations. The man re- 
quires the woman in order to the exercise of his 
procreative power, in which respect he is ‘‘ the 
image of God”’ (xi. 7) the Creator; and the wo~ 
man requires the man in order that her capacity 
for receiving may become an actual conception, 
and her constitutional fitness for being a mother 
may attain to its proper development and exer- 
cise. 

These mutual needs, so divinely ordained, lead 
to reciprocal obligations and claims in their re- 
lations to each other. Each has a right in the 
body of the other, and each is bound to yield to 
the other for sexual intercourse, so that no ca- 
pricious one-sided refusal is allowable. Only 
an occasional abstinence by mutual consent for 
higher moral and religious ends is permitted. 


144 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, 


—_O ee 


But another consideration comes ia here. 
Men are sinful. All their sensual impulses, 
especially the sexual instincts—the strongest of 
them all—have escaped from the control of the 
Spirit, from which they ought to receive their 
first motion. Instead of being the pure expres- 
sion and exercise of love—free surrender of one- 
self for the pleasure and gratification of another 
—sexual commerce has become one of the worst 
forms in which a degrading selfishness manifests 
itself—a selfishness which prompts persons to 
seek others only to use them for their own grati- 
fication. Among mankind thus corrupted, mar- 
riage, therefore, appears as providentially de- 
signed to guard against the inordinate and ir- 
regular satisfaction of sexual passion, so that it 
shall not be indulged in promiscuously, as op- 
portunity might be afforded; but that two per- 
sons bound together during their whole life, and 
in their entire personality, shall devote them- 
selyes to each other even in reference to this 
particular, [that so, if possible, mere passion 
may be refined through the power of a purer 
affection and the discipline of domestic life]. 

The less now the virtue of continence—that 
is, the power of the spirit over the animal pas- 
sions—is cultivated and trained in full strength, 
the more needful will it be to take care that the 
abstinence agreed upon for special reasons, be 
not too long extended, lest either party be ex- 
posed to temptation for unlawful indulgence. 
[See WuHEwEtLu’s ‘‘Elements of Morality,” B. IV. 
chap. VII., Art. 630. Baxrer’s ‘Christian Eth- 
ics,” Pt. If. Chap. 1 and 7. ‘‘Haruzss, Christ. 
Fithik,” % 52 A. a.; also “τυ κα Sittenlehre, 3 
152, 1591. 

2. Celibacy, its occasion, and how far praise- 
worthy. This stringency of the marriage obliga- 
tion, which indeed, carries with it a wealth of 
moral and religious elements, is apt to evoke a 
reaction through the natural effort of the Chris- 
tian after liberty and holiness—after an un- 
trammeled and undivided devotion to his Lord— 
after a perfect consecration of soul and body to 
his service, and after an undisturbed enjoyment 
of fellowship with Him. This effort resulting in 
celibacy, is morally justifiable only on certain 
conditions. These are: 1, Provided that it is 
not prompted by a carnal love of ease, and by a 
dread of domestic crosses, and is likewise free 
from all spiritual pride and ambition, which, by 
refraining from marriage, aspires to possess a 
special sanctity, and to merit a higher degree of 
blessedness and glory. 2, Provided it is not 
tinctured with mere caprice, or will-worship, or 
prudery, or vanity, or any such moral perverse- 
ness. 8, Provided itis prompted by a conscious- 
ness—not, indeed, of an incapacity for marriage, 
which would render the act morally reprehensi- 
ble—but of a peculiar fitness for a single life 
yvouchsafed by the Lord, and of a Divine call to 
some sphere of labor in God’s kingdom, to which 
the married state would offer impediments; or 
occasioned by providential obstructions put in 
the way of some desired and sought for marriage 
connections, and by the quiet pondering of the 
Divine will as indicated in such occurrences; 
and, 4, provided, in general, a lack of inclina- 
tion for marriage—which, on looking up to God 
and invoking His direction in the matter, comes 


——— Ee 
a ες ἐπ Ξ αὐτου ὐπρκ.. 00 ὕ.β..0.....5:3.ἕ ΞΘΒΕΘΕ ΘῸῈΡ 9 5955. Ξ Ὁ: :5.-. Ὁ 


to be regarded asa Divine hint as to duty—leads 
a person toremain unmarried. [When these con- 
ditions exist, celibacy and widowhood are stateg 
wherein some of the noblest traits of the Chris- 
tian life may be displayed, and are no less hon- 
orable than that of wedlock. To disparage them 
in any way, is to put contempt on the plain doe- 
trine of the Gospel. But no less un-Christian, 
not to say unnatural, is it to ascribe any inhe- 
rent superior excellence to these states, and to 
make them the essential conditions of superior 
sanctity, and to impose them by authority upon 
any class of persons in the Church, as, e. g., on 
the clergy. The Romish doctrine on this point 
is not merely utterly groundless, but contrary 
to the express teachings of Scripture, and to the 
example of most of the Apostles. Paul himself 
specifies ‘‘ the forbidding to marry”’ among the 
doctrines of devils, and when we would expect 
him to counsel virginity according to Romish 
teaching, he says rather (1 Tim. ii. 15) “186 wo- 
man shall be saved in child-bearing, if they con- 
tinue in faith and charity.””"] Hence, where the 
above-mentioned conditions do not exist, and 
there appears to be a demand for marriage, and 
a well-grounded hope that it will be a fellowship 
in the Lord, and for the furtherance of his king- 
dom, and it appears to be the will of God, then 
does an obligation arise to enter into it [both 
for the good of the parties concerned, and] for 
the propagation of the race, and the rearing of 
future generations morally, socially and reli- 
giously in this relation. 

The Apostolic counsels in regard to celibacy, 
given as they were in anticipation of Christ’s 
speedy coming, in which case the obligation to 
marriage is lessened by reason of the impending 
dissolution of all earthly things, acquire new 
force whenever sure signs lead us to expect this 
catastrophe as at hand. [See on this subject 
Baxter ‘Christian Ethics,” Book ii. chap. 1; 
Wurrke ‘Sittenlehre,” ἢ 295; Scuarr Hist. Ap. 
Ch., 3 112.] 

8. Divorce, its wrong and its right. The volun- 
tary dissolution of a Christian marriage is a de- 
parture from a state ordained by God,—the 
rupture of a covenant with which members of 
His Church have entered with each other, in His 
name, and in which they have thus obligated 
themselves to live together as husband and wife, 
even under the most severe and trying circum- 
stances, faithful unto death. A separation can 
properly take place only under the conditions 
appointed by God Himself, through Christ, viz., 
the actual dissolution of the marriage bond by 
the other party in adultery or fornication, which 
is in fact a surrender of one’s self toa third party 
in such wise asis allowable only in marriage, and 
is reserved by the ordinance of God exclusively 
for those thus allied. Should any one wish to 
separate from his consort out of disinclination to 
marital intercourse, or from a dread of it, under 
the idea that it involved defilement, or through 
a general desire for liberty in this respeci, ke 
would, in so doing, be guilty of violating the 
most solemn obligations, and become chargeable 
with immorality. When conscientious scruples 
arise in these respects, it becomes a Christian to 
consult his paster, or some experienced Christian 
friend, and above all to lay the matter in prayer 





CHAP. VII. 1-11. 


145 





before God, that he may be enlightened and in- 
structed from on high, and that his partner might 
be induced to enter into some agreement that 
would not infringe on his conscience. Even 
though marriage has become burdensome, a per- 
son must still bear it from a sense of duty, in 
obedience to the Divine ordinance, and in con- 
formity with the claims of the institution.— 
Mere aversion on the part of the one or the other, 
or of both, mortifications, maltreatment, sick- 
ness however incurable, whether of body or 
mind, furnish no warrant for divorce. A tem- 
porary separation, accompanied with a readiness 
for reunion, may, under certain circumstances, 
be allowed as the only means for restoring again 
the disturbed relations, and causing a return to 
aright tone of feeling, and effecting a lasting 
improvement. 
If anything else, however, can be accepted as 
a ground for divorce, subsumed as it were under 
the head of adultery, it is malicious desertion. 
| This means, the deliberate forsaking of the one 
\party by the other, with the unmistakable or de- 
‘elared design of abandoning the marriage con- 
‘nection altogether. And this is nothing less 
‘than the actual dissolution of the bond, by which 
the obligation of the other party to fidelity is 
/annulled. Yet, in this case, no right-minded 
person will bein haste to obtain a formal divorce. 
Rather he will be inclined to wait as long as 
possible, in the hope of seeing some change occur 
in the temper of the other party, which will lead 
to reconciliation and cohabitation once more. 
And such forbearance will show itself, even in 
the case of adultery, for even in such circum- 
stances may the spirit of Christian faith signal- 
ize its patience.—And then, in reference to the 
- forming of a new connection; after so severe a 
chastisement, which not unfrequently wears the 
character of a judgment on the conduct of him 
who suffers it—it may be for the manner in 
which he contracted the marriage, or for the 
manner in which he has maintained it—a true 
Christian will be naturally disposed to consider 
with great care, whether he ought to enter into a 
new relation; and with prayer for heavenly in- 
struction he will seek to ascertain what is God’s 
will in the matter, and whether it be not a mere 
selfish inclination (which we are very apt to 
take for God’s will) that is moving him to marry 
again. And the whole issue of things he will 
leave to God, in humble resignation to His deci- 
sion. And should God’s providence seem to 
enjoin self-denial for a longer or shorter period, 
he will entreat Him day by day for the supplies 
of that grace which shall strengthen him to 
endure in all patience and purity. 
| But here anew point comes up. If theadultery 
‘committed, whether it be in the form of fornica- 
πῶς or of malicious desertion, be not a momen- 
tary lapse not likely to be repeated, but is a set- 
| tled thing, which no patience, or gentleness, or 
| efforts at conciliation can overcome, then it will be 
right to infer that the Christian character of the 
guilty party is in such a case entirely renounced, 
and to treat him as standing in the relation of an 
unbeliever, or, still worse, of a heathen Here, 
then, we would have, to all intents, an instance 
of mixed marriage, such as that spoken of in the 
next section. It would be in vain, then to look 
10 


for the hallowing of one party by the other; and 


all continuance in a connection, which only ob-\ ~ 


structs the purpose of the Divine calling, and 
mars our peace, for some vague hope of recover- | 
ing the lost, would be wholly unwarranted, and 
contrary to the Divine will. 

From that which, according to the rule of 
Scripture, is right for the individual believer, 
we may infer the duty of the Church and the State 
in reference to marriage. First of all, the Church 
acknowledges itself as bound to the work of the 
Lord, and can, with good conscience, sanction 
no divorce and marriage of the separated par- 
ties again in other connections, contrary to His 
expressed will. The State, as an institution, 
which with its enactments and executive acts 
is rooted in the principles of Christianity, must 
aim to conform its marriage legislation to these. 
But inasmuch as strict conformity is not pos- 
sible for it, the State must at least grant the 
Church the liberty of abiding by the decisions 
of her Lord, and protect it in the maintenance 
of its right. It must not require the Church to 
bless those un-Christian marriages which it may 
feel constrained to allow; nor must it hinder 
the Church from enforcing its discipline upon 
those who form permanent connections after a 
manner ordained by it, when not accordant with 
the Divine rule. Such is the position to be 
clearly and distinctly taken in the case. 

But it is a question whether our mixed con- 
gregations do not admit, or even require some 
modification of such proceedings ?—whether an 
extension of the principle of analogy already 
employed in granting divorces for malicious de- 
sertion, is not proper and necessary in other 
cases also, which may in like manner be re- 
garded as a dissolution of the marriage tie. 
This is one of the pressing questions of the day, 
a further investigation of which would, however, 
lead us too far. 

Much that is not good has place under the 
forbearance of our Heavenly Father. And it is 
a question whether the Church ought not to exer- 
cise a maternal patience towards much which 
she cannot sanction? This, in fact, no one will 
deny. Nevertheless she must hold by the au- 
thority of God’s word, and try to enforce it. 
And her wisdom will show itself in wise endea- 
vors to combine the two in a befitting manner. 
Consult on this question Hv. Kirch. Zeit. and 
Neue Ev. Kirch. Zeit. for 1859 [also WHEWELL, 
Elements of Morality, 3 633-635 and ὃ 1027-10387; 
NeANvER, Life of Christ, 3155, note, and 3 224; 
Herzog, Enc. Art. Lhe., Bax. Ch. Εἰ. B. 11, ch. 9]. 


; 
' 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[I. Celibacy or the single state, when main- 
tained for worthy ends, being good, and in ac- 
cordance with Apostolic example: 1, instead of 
encountering ridicule, or held in reproach, 
should be held in highest honor, ver.1; 2, ought 
not to be preferred voluntarily, unless in accord- 
ance with the clear will of God, as intimated in 
the gift of continence, ver. 7; 3, should not be 
enforced by commandment upon any class of 
persons, ver. 6; 4, when thus enforced it is apt 
to lead to gross immoralities, ver. 2]. 

[II. Marriage, too, so far from involving spiri- 


140 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, 





tual contamination, as ascetics pretend, is: 1, 
good, as a safeguard against licentiousness and 
a help to purity, ver. 2; 2, should be entered 
into with full consent to all its obligations, ver. 3; 
8, involves entire self-denialin affectionateregard 
each for the other, ver. 4; and 4, can be suspended 
long only at a hazard to morals, ver. 5; though, 
5, a temporary suspension, like fasting, may oc- 
casionally be advisable, as furnishing greater 
freedom to devotion, ver. 5. 6, Being a union 
for life, neither party is at liberty to move for 
its dissolution, and one can be released from the 
obligation only by the infidelity or death of the 
ether, ver. 10]. 

SrarkeE :—In view of the race, it was not good 
for the first man to be alone; in view of special 
circumstances and gifts it may be good for par- 
ticular individuals to abide alone, ver. 1.—Sprr- 
neR:—Marriage is an antidote to the poison of 
sensuality.—Hep. :—Marriage intercourse is not 
sinful lewdness—not a mere licensed fornication, 
ver. 3.—Crusius:—In marriage a person parts 
with his liberty, and binds his entire person to 
another, ver. 4.—Marriage pleasures, like all 
others, may be suspended awhile for purposes 
of more concentrated devotion, ver. 5.—HED. :— 
Abstinence is not commanded, only allowed— 
hence not to practise it is not sinful. Yet even 
here there must be moderation and self-disci- 
pline. All immodest indulgence and abuse of 
this holy state is an abomination in the sight of 
a holy God, ver. 6.—Hep. :—Without the Divine 
gift of continence, it were better to marry. Yet 
even with this a person is at liberty to marry, 
for thus he is better able to preserve the purity 
of his married life, especially if he have a partner 
like-minded, ver. 9.— Is1p :—The desire for mar- 
riage is divinely implanted like hunger for food. 
But alas for the heathenish dishonor and scorn— 
the hypocritical contempt—the un-Christian pro- 
hibition put upon this sacred institution by priests 
and soldiers !—Hep. :—Marriage is no exchange 
bank. Lovemust here rule. But what the devil 
unites, and fleshly lust knits, and avarice and am- 
bition couples, has poor luck and little blessing or 
aid. Pious people endure, and are silent, and 
shun evil occasions, and seek peace, ver. 10.—In 
the married state it often happens that one is not 
content with the other. But the only remedy in 
such cases is patience. It is no longer a ques- 
tion, what sort of a wife a man shall have, but 
how he shall best adapt himself to the one in 
possession. 

Beru. Brs.:—Ver. 2. A well-regulated mar- 
riage opposes a dam to a large current of scan- 
dals.—Ver. 4. Many pretend that the man is 
not bound. But he is. He himself has con- 
cluded the bond and given the pledge, and both 
parties must recognize the debt.—Ver. 5. In 
making vows a person must take himself into 
careful consideration. Few know the depths of 
corruption in them and the power of Satan. We 
must be humble. The agreement to abstain 
must arise from faith, and faith is humble. 
Earnest progress in the Divine life requires of 
them who marry, because of incontinence, that 
they cherish a constant, heartfelt confidence in 
God, and devote time and energy to the mortifi- 
cation of the body and to prayer. Butsince this 
cannot be properly done, avoid fleshly excite- 


ments; occasional abstinence becomes needful 


and obligatory. Yet nature must maintain its” 


original rights; for ἐξ is not sin, but only tainted 
with sin. When purged by the blood of Christ, 
it resumes its prerogatives. It is God’s work, 
not the devil’s. In attempting to destroy the 
latter, I must not assail the former. Yea, the 
flesh often gains the more power by too much 
tampering with the body. In attempting more 
than we can carry out, we fall back sadly, and 
then the world taunts and vilifies.—Ver. 7. Di- 
versity of character gives rise to a variety of 
conditions, which must be harmonized by the 
unific power of Divine grace. —Ver. 8. Every 
mode of life has its advantages and disadyan- 
tages, and a Christian must learn to strike the 


balance.—Ver. 10. Marriage should be held sa- 


cred. The difficulties which attend it, God must 
be trusted to remove. If the law of Christianity 
be regarded as a law, it will, indeed, press hard; 
but there is mercy under such constraints, and 
every trouble should be considered an opportu- 
nity for the exercise of faith, hope, patience and 
love. Man is fickle and changeable. If now 
the marriage relation could be readily altered, 
this would serve greatly to foster this fickleness 
and levity, and so increase the evil. Hence, we 
see the holiness of the Divine ordinance eyen in 
respect to its apparent severity. Adultery alone 
is allowed as cause for divorce, and this because 
it breaks the bond. All other causes originate 
in a dread of the cross, and against this we must 
ever strive. Instead of following our natural 
inclinations when, 6. g., ἃ man has an inyalid 
wife, he should reflect: ‘so must I remain; here 
is my opportunity to exercise love; here I 
ought to be gladly; here is a Lazarus. God is 
now putting me to the proof.’—Ver. 11. “Let 
her remain unmarried,”’ and so let another bur- 
den press her, because she has wished to escape 
the burden of God’s law. ‘Or let her become 
reconciled,” this were better done. But it will 
cost more than a couple of words to do it. There 
will be needed earnest effort, a disposition to re- 
new her covenant and begin it afresh in quite a 
different spirit from before. 

Heuspner:—Ver. 1. A single life is commen- 
dable for a man only when it is maintained for 
the kingdom of Heaven’s sake. The worth of 
celibacy is conditioned on personal relations and 
the period in which a person lives.—Ver. 4. Man 
and wife belong to. each other—body and soul. 
There must be a corresponding surrender on the 
part of each.—Ver. 5. It is our duty to put lim- 
its on the charm of marital intercourse, in order 
to have time and inclination for religious exer- 
cises. There is danger of clogging from too much 
indulgence. Hours of solitude and prayer pre- 
serve the sweetness and purity of marriage. 
Christianity hits the golden mean.—Ver. 7. It 
is the token of a holy heart when a person can 
wish that all were like him.—Ver. 8. A false as- 
ceticism comes not within the scope of the Apos- 
tle. 1. What he gives is advice, and that, 2. 
suited to the times. 38. Elsewhere he gives mar- 
riage the preference (Eph. v. 2f.), and reckons 
the prohibition of marriage among the doctrines 
of devils (1 Tim. iv. 3); 4, and ascribes no merit 
to celibacy, which state has worth only when 
the heart is pure.—Ver. 10. According to God’s 


CHAP. VII. 12-24. 147 








law marriages are as indissoluble as is the | portance of fasting for the same purposes proves 


union of Christ with His Church. 


the evil of eating and drinking. But it is the 


[OusHausen: —Ver. 2. An apparently low| part of believers to consider wisely when to eat 


view of marriage; but only its negative side 
here presented in view of particular circum- 
stances. There is implied here an indirect ex- 
hortation to proud Christians not to sink into 
the slough of sin by a contempt of marriage.— 
Ver. 3. The begetting of children, not the only 
legitimate end of marital intercourse. It is the 
outward expression of a true spiritual union]. 
[Catvin:—Ver. 5. The importance of absti- 
nence in marriage for the purpose of prayer, no 


and drink, and when to fast. So in the other 
case.—Ver. 6. A false estimate of virginity led 
to three errors: 1, pronouncing it the most ex- 
cellent of virtues, and the very worship of God; 
2, adoption of it by numbers who had not the 
gift; 8, the enforcement of it on the ministry, 
and their consequent awful corruption—while 
many prudent and pious men were kept from the 
sacred calling, refusing to ensnare themselves in 
this way. See Jnst, B. IV, chap. XII. 3 23-28]. 


. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. 


more proves the evil of the thing than the im- 


The course to be pursued by the believer in different circumstances. The general 


B.—Mized marriages. 
principles involved, stated and illustrated in parallel cases. 


Cuapter VII. 12-24. 


12 But to the rest speak 1,1 not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth 
13 not, and she? be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the 
woman which [who] hath a husband that believeth not, and if he? be pleased to dwell 
14 with her, let her not leave him [her husband*]. For the unbelieving husband is 
sanctified by [in, ἐν] the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by [in, ἐν] the 
husband [the brother*]: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 
A brother or a sister is not under 
16 bondage in such cases: but God hath called us [you®] to [in, ἐν] peace. For what 
knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O 
17 man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? But as God [the Lord®] hath distributed 
[allotted] to every man, as the Lord [0045] hath called every one, so let him walk. 
18 And so ordain I in all churches. Is [Was] any man called being circumcised? let 
him not become uncircumcised. Is any [Has any been"] called in uncircumcision? 
19 let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncireumcision is nothing, 
20 but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let every man abide in the same 
21 calling wherein he was called. Art [Wert] thou called being a servant [slave]? care 
22 not for it: but [even] if thou mayest be made free, use ἐξ rather. For he [the slave] 
that is called in the Lord, being a servant [om. being a servant] is the Lord’s free- 
man :° likewise also [om. also] he [the freeman] that is called, being free [om. being 
23 free], is Christ’s servant. Ye are bought with a price: be [become] not ye the ser- 
24 vants of men. Brethren, let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God. 


1 Ver. 12.—The Rec. has ἐγὼ λέγω [with Ὁ. F. K. L.]. The oldest authorities [A. B. ©. Cod. Sin.] read λέγω ἐγώ. 

2 Vers. 12, 13.--αΟἀὀ}ὕτη---οὗτος, [according to A. B. C. D.1 F. Cod. Sin.].. The Rec. has αὐτή---αὐτὸς, 

8 Ver. 13.—Rec. has αὐτόν, to conform with ver. 11. The great preponderance of authorities is in favor of τὸν ἄνδρα. 

4 Ver. 14.— AdeA$a, according to the best and oldest authorities [and, as Alford says, has peculiar force here]. The 


Rec. has ἄνδρι, which is a gloss. 
5 Ver. 15.—The Rec. has ἡμᾶς, according to weighty authorities; and so, Lachmann [and Alf., Stanley, e¢ al.J. ὕμᾶς 


is internally the more probable, [and is found in A. C. K. Cod. Sin.1). 
6 Ver. 17._The Rec. has transposed the proper order of ὃ κυρίος and θέος on very feeble authority. [A. B.C. Ὁ. F. Cod. 


Sin. Syr. read as above]. 
7 Ver. 18.—The Rec. has τὶς ἐκλήθη, in conformity with the previous one. But the best authorities have the perfect; 


κέκληται τις, and this is adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alf., and Stanley]. 
8 Ver. 22.—The Rec. has καὶ after ὁμοίως with K. L. It is omitted in A. B. Cod. Sin. Syr., and by Alf., Stanley]. 


is plain, that in what he has been saying he has 
had to do solely with parties who were both 
Se eet: Christian. But now he comes to consider a re- 
Vers. 12-14. But to the rest.—By these he | lation to which the command of our Lord does 
evidently means those living in mixed marriage, | not absolutely apply. That was a command for 
haying been converted in wedlock. From this it | disciples alone; but here those were involved 


148 





who did not acknowledge subjection to him; and 
the continuance of the connection depended 
largely on their own free will. In this case 
now, the Spirit of the Lord, dwelling in the 
Apostle, and developing more fully and com- 
pletely the injunctions given by him on earth, 
was called to make known what was right, in 
accordance with the mind of Christ. And it is 
to this he points when he premises—say I, not 
the Lord.—[The distinction here made, is 
simply one of fact as to the form—not one of au- 
thority]. His injunction is still an expression of 
the Lord’s will—if any brother has an unbe- 
lieving wife, let him not put her away.— 
Yet this is conditioned on the pleasure of the wife 
—if she be pleased to dwell with him.— 
And this presupposes, on the one hand, that the 
husband, by reason of his higher love, and of his 
conviction, of the sanctity of marriage, had an 
inclination to abide with his wife; and, on the 
other hand, that the wife had some respect for 
Christianity, and presented no obstacle to the 
practice of it. [‘*We see from this how de- 
spised the Christians were at that time by the 
heathen, since even wives would leave their hus- 
bands because they had been converted to Chris- 
tianity.” Bittroru. And the threat of this is 
one great obstacle to the conversion of men in 
heathendom at this day ].—Oixeiy is used in the 
classics the same as here, and in this connection 
means, to house with. [Here Curys. says: ‘‘He 
that putteth away his wife for fornication is not 
condemned, because he that is one body with 
her that is a harlot, is polluted; and the mar- 
riage bond is broken by fornication, but not by 
unbelief. Therefore it is lawful to put away a 
wife for the former sin, but not for the latter. 
But is not he who is joined with an idolatress 
one body? Yes, but not polluted by her. The 
holiness of the faithful husband prevails over 
the unholiness of the unbelieving wife. They 
are joined together in that respect in which she 
is not unholy. But not so in the case of an 
adulteress.” Worps.|].—And whatever wo- 
man have an unbelieving husband, and 
this one be pleased to dwell with her.— 
In καὶ οὗτος there is a change of construction, 
which appears also often among the Greeks. It 
is the introduction of a demonstrative in an ac- 
cessory clause. Otherwise it would be καὶ αὐτος, 
which the Rec. has. [On this oratio variata see 
Winer ἢ LXIII. 2,1; also on the use of ὅστις for 
ei τις see JELF, ἢ 816, 8, 7].—Let her not re- 
pudiate her husband.—The use of ἀφιέναι in 
reference to the wife is somewhat remarkable. 
It means [properly, to put away, and is the same 
word as that used in the case of the man; but] 
here, to leave, to give up; [and so the E. V. ren- 
ders it, making a distinction in the rendering by 
reason of the diversity of the subject. Alford 
well says, ‘“‘this is unfortunate;’’ and there 
seems no adequate reason for it, as may be seen 
from what follows. Robinson translates alike in 
both cases]. Elsewhere, Mark x. 11, ἀπολύειν is 
predicated as well of the wife as of the husband. 
Bengel, whom Meyer follows, says, ‘‘the nobler 
part dismisses,” and this, in this instance, is the 
Christian party. According to Greek, as well as 
Roman law, the wife also had the liberty of ob- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


| 


this respect was somewhat modified by Rabbini- 
cal definitions. Licur. II]. 191. [Hence, there 
is good ground for affirming that it is not simple 
abandonment, but formal divorce that the Apos- 
tle here prohibits. So Hodge]. 

The above injunction he next proceeds to 


establish; and opposes the tendency to desertion _ 


arising from the dread of contamination through 
intimate communion with an unbeliever, by 
pointing to the fact, that in this case [the grace 
of Christianity triumphs over the disparity, 
and] the unbelieving party, [so far from dese- 
crating the other, is himself sanctified by con- 
nection with the believing one.J—For the un- 
believing husband is sanctified in the 
believing wife, and the unbelieving wife 
is sanctified in the brother.— ‘The verb 
ἡγίασται, is sanctified, is not to be construed sub- 
jectively; since the supposition is, that the sanc- 
tifying principle—even faith, is here wanting. 
Neither does it point to a future conversion an- 
ticipated, (candidatus fidei) ; still less does it im- 
ply the sanctification of the marriage intercourse 
through the prayer of the believing party; but 
it denotes the Christian theocratic consecration. 
The unchristian partner standing, as he does, in 
vital union with a believer (one flesh), partici- 
pates in his or her consecration, and is not to be 
regarded as profane, but™as connected by this 
link to the Church of God, and to God’s people. 
The phrases, ἐν τῇ γυναικὶ----ἐν τῷ ἀδελφῷ, in the 
wife—in the brother, denote that the sanctification 
here comes through the Christian partner, whose 
character, as holy, passes over and is imputed 
to the unchristian partner. Hence, it followed 
that the marriage was still to be regarded as one 
acceptable to God, and that, therefore, the 
Christian party was to continue therein, so far 
as it was possible for him or her todoso. True 
enough it was, indeed, that the unbelieving 
party, by his consent to remain in such rela- 
tion to the Christian community, afforded some 
ground for hope that he would, in the end, 
prove altogether acceptable to the Church, under 
whose spiritual influence he was thus brought; 
but this fact is not here distinctly expressed. 

To prove this relative sanctification of the un- 
believing party, through connection with the 
believing one, he introduces the following apa- 


gogic statement.—Blse were your children. 


unclean, but now are they holy.—’Ere? 
apa; since then, i. e., in case this sanctification 
did not exist (comp. chap. v. 10). His meaning 
is this: if that vital communion which existed 
between the married parties, of which one was 
a believer and another not, imparted to the lat- 
ter no sacredness, then it would follow that the 
like vital union between Christian parents and 
their children, would not impart to the latter 
any sacredness,—that the children of Christians 
themselves must be regarded as impure and pro- 
fane, like the heathen. But to such an inference 
he opposes the views already held among them, 
that these children were holy,—that they, by 
virtue of théir vital connection with Christian 
parents, were to be regarded as properly belong- 
ing to God’s holy people. And if such a view 
were tenable, he argues a like result in favor 
of the unbelieving married parties; that they 


taining divorce; among the Jews, too, the law in | were similarly sanctified by a collateral union 


CHAP. VII. 12-24. 


149 


Ls 


{ Hodge, however, with more correctness, states 
the argument differently. He says: ‘*The most 
natural, and hence the most generally adopted 
view, is this: ‘The children of these mixed mar- 
riages are universally acknowledged as holy; 
that is, as belonging to the Church. If this be 
correct, as no one disputes, the marriages them- 
selves must be consistent with the laws of God. 
The unbelieving must be sanctified by the be- 
lieving partner, otherwise your children would 
be unclean, ἡ. 6., born out of the pale of the 
Church.’—The principle in question was not a 
new one, to be then first determined by Chris- 
tian usage. It was, at least, as old as the Jewish 
economy, and familiar wherever Jewish laws 
and the facts of Jewish history were known. 
Paul circumcised Timothy, whose father was a 
Greek, while his mother was a Jewess, because 
he knew that his countrymen regarded circum- 
cision in such cases as obligatory.” Acts xvi. 
1-3. Barnes most unaccountably interprets ‘‘un- 
clean” to mean ‘‘illegitimate.” Then ‘holy,” 
of course, must mean legitimate, contrary to all 
usage. ]—This whole argument militates against, 
rather than favors the existence of the practice 
of Infant Baptism at that period. (Comp. Meyer 
and de Wette, Stud. and Krit., 1830, p. 669ff.; 
[also Neander, Stanley and Alford in loco). Had 
such a practice existed, it would be fair to pre- 
sume, that the Apostle would have alluded to it 
specifically, in confirmation of his position. 
Here, most of all, would have been the place 
to have mentioned it by name, as furnishing 
ecclesiastical authority for the view he had taken. 
The fact that he did not mention it, therefore, 
affords some reason for concluding that the rite 
did not exist. |—It is another question, however, 
whether this passage does not furnish an im- 
portant ground on which to establish the rite of 
Infant Baptism. According to Jewish notions, 
the baptism of a female proselyte sufficed for that 
of her child, which was afterwards born of her, 
so that this did not then need to be baptized. 
But so far as baptism is a means of grace, we may 
infer from this statement of the Apostle, that 
there was a claim for it on the part of the child, 
who had been already consecrated to God by 
virtue of his having been born of Christian 
parents. That relation to the kingdom of God 
which is founded on parentage, is sealed through 
baptism; and the child is set apart in a solemn 
manner as a partaker of the fulness of grace im- 
parted to the Church. [On the whole subject 
see JoHN M. Mason’s Works, Vol. IV., pp. 873- 
382, who takes this in direct evidence of Infant 
Baptism; and also Hodge’s note, who says: 
«Some modern German writers find in this pas- 
sage a proof that Infant Baptism was unknown 
in the Apostolic Church. They say that Paul 
does not attribute the holiness of children to 
their parentage; if they were baptized—because 
their consecration would then be due to that rite, 
and not to their descent. This is strange rea- 
soning. The truth is, they were baptized, not 
to make them holy, but because they were holy. 
The Jewish child was circumcised because he 
was a Jew, and not to make him one. So Chris- 
tian children are not made holy by baptism, but 
they are baptized because they are holy.” See 
also Hooker, He. Pol. Ch. LX.]. Ὕ μῶν refers 











to the Christian parents generally, who in mixed 
marriages were not excluded. Νῦν dé, but now, 
logical, as in chap. v. 11. On aya compare Ben- 
gel and Osiander. 

Vers. 15, 16. He here considers the possible 
alternative.—But if the unbelieving depart 
—How then?—let him depart.—‘ That is his 
affair; he must be allowed to decide it for him- 
self.’ And in such a case ‘‘let the brother or 
sister be patient, nor let him think that anything 
ought to be changed which cannot be changed.” 
Brencet. That which follows, annexed by no 
connecting particle, confirms this advice.—The 
brother or the sister is not bound in such 
cases.—He here assigns the reasons why a 
divorce should be allowed on the part of the 
Christian ; and the words cannot simply mean: 
‘he is not bound to crowd himself upon the 
other,’ [to insist upon the connection, as in the 
case where both are Christians (as Photius, 
Alford, Billroth)]; but they carry the further 
implication: ‘is not unconditionally bound to 
the marriage relationship like a slave,’ —“‘is free.’ 
Aéderat, as in ver. 39 (comp. Osiander). The 
words ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις are either Mase. 
by such (not, to such) as separate themselves; or 
which is better, Neut.; wnder such circumstances 
(comp. Phil. iv. 11; Rom. viii. 87; Jno. iv. 37), 
“The Apostle only means, that in matters of re- 
ligious conviction, one person cannot be the 
slave of another, [that a married Christian per- 
son cannot be forced to remain with a heathen 
consort, if the latter will not allow the exercise 
of his own religious views. Under such circum- 
stances separation should be allowed; but con- 
cerning liberty to marry again, nothing is here 
said.” Neanper. |*—But in peace God hath 
called us.—This is directly connected with the 
foregoing, and confirms still further the propriety 
of the injunction: ‘‘let him depart.”—The deter- 
mination to continue in marriage against the will 
of the other party, would lead to hatred and 
strife; and this would be contrary to the peace- 
ful character of the Christian calling.—Ev 
εἰρήνῃ, in peace, t. é., either: ‘to this end, that we 
may live in peace;’ in which case it would be 
equivalent to: unto peace [according to our Eng- 
lish version] denoting the object of the call;} or: 





[* Here it will be seen that Neander does not find in the 
expression, “is not bound,” all that Kling does, 7. e., an ab- 
solute release from marital obligation. And in this he coin- 
cides with Hammond, Whitby, Bloomfield and others, who 
suppose that nothing more than a separation from each 
other’s society is here allowed. Yet the use of the word 
δέδεται, is bound, in ver. 39, where it evidently implies the 
marriage bond, seems to sustain Kling’s view. The deser- 
tion of the unbelieving party leaves the believing free. If 
any restriction upon this freedom was intended, we find it 
only in the context (see vv. 10,11,and 30). “This passage,” 
says Hodge, “is of great importance, because it is the foun- 
dation of the Protestant doctrine, that wilful desertion is a@ 
legitimate ground of divorce.” President Wolsey, however, 
in his Article on Divorce, in the New Englander, April, 1867, 
pp. 228-238, argues with great plausibility and force against 
the legitimacy of the inference. The whole controversy 
turns upon the meaning given to the words ov δεδούλωται, 
“is not bound.” Does this phrase imply absolute release 
from the marriage obligation, and permission to marry 
again? or does it simply give permission to the deserted 
party to live apart without feeling constrained to enforce 
cohabitation? Persons interpret variously, according to 
their predilections. In fault of any deciding element in the 
text, it will perhaps be best to abide by the injunctions of 
Christ, in Matth. v. 31, 32; xix. 3-9.] 


+ [Winer says that ἐν is used for eis after verbs of motion, 
for the purpose of briefly expressing at once the motion it 


150 





‘since he has proclaimed to us the Gospel of 
peace, the essential effect of which is peace,’— 
denoting the way and mode of the calling (comp. 
Eph. iv. 1; 1 Thes. iv. 7; Luke xi. 11). Fun- 
damentally, both constructions amount to the 
same thing; and imply that any separation would 
contravene the spirit of the Divine calling, inas- 
much as it would increase existing estrangement 
and cause new outbreaks. [‘*Hence it is that 
the Rabbins, and Maimonides famous among the 
rest, ina book of his, set forth by Buxtorfius, 
tells us that ‘divorce was permitted by Moses to 
preserve peace in marriage, and quiet in the 
family.’ Minron.] This view corresponds to 
the whole train of thought, and agrees well with 
what follows. On the other hand, that view 
which regards the Apostle as here putting a limi- 
tation on the injunction: ‘let him depart,’ intro- 
duced adversatively by the particle, dé, as if he 
meant to say: ‘a separation, however, ought, if 
possible, to be avoided,’ is at variance with his 
line of argument [see below]. 

The Apostle yet further confirms his advice by 
obviating a doubt which contained a strong mo- 
tive for resisting separation in the case supposed, 
viz.: whether the salvation of the unbelieving 
party, which might be secured by a continuance 
of the connection, would not hereby be cut off. 
This he meets by pointing to the utter uncer- 
tainty of the results of any efforts directed to 
this end.—For what knowest thou, O! 
woman, whether thou shalt save thy 
husband.—tThe meaning is, thou canst have no 
assurance that thou wilt be the means of saving 
him. [On the force of the εἰ, see Jen, Vol. 11., 
ἢ 877 B.].—Xlerv, to save, as in chap. i. 18, is 
used here in a relative sense, g. d., to be the in- 
strument of saving, as chap. ix. 22; Rom. xi. 
14; 1 Tim. iv. 16.—[‘ This verse is generally 
understood as stating a ground for remaining 
umited, as ver. 13, in hope that conversion of the 
unbelieving party may follow. Thus ver. 15 is 
regarded as altogether parenthetical. But 1, 
this interpretation is harsh, as regards the con- 
text, for ver. 15 is evidently not parenthetical,— 
and 2, it is hardly admissible grammatically, for, 
it makes ciel wf,—‘What knowest thou, whether 
thou shalt not save?’ Lyra seems first to have 
proposed the true rendering, which was after- 
wards adopted hesitatingly by Estius, and of late 
decidedly by Meyer, de Wette, and Bisping; 
viz., that the verse is not a ground for remaining 
united, in hope, etc., but a ground for consum- 
mating a separation, and not marring the Chris- 
tian’s peace for so uncertain a prospect as that 
of converting the unbelieving party. Τί οὔδας εἰ 
thus preserves its strict sense: what knowest 
thou (about the question) whether, etc.? and the 
verse coheres with the words immediately pre- 
ceding, ἐν eipgvn κἔκληκεν ἡμᾶς ὁ ϑέος. Those who 
take εἰ for ei μή, attempt to justify it by referring 
to 2 Sam. xii. 22; Joel ii. 14; Jonah iii. 9, where 


the uxx. have for Heb. yu 90, τίς oldev εἰ, 


to express hope: but in every one of these pas- 
sages the verb stands in the emphatic position, 





self, and the result of it, viz.. rest. An instance of this 
breviloquence he finds here. The peace is the abiding con- 
dition in, which those who have been called unto it are to 
rest. Nor must the use of the perfect here be overlooked.] 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


---------.-» 





and the Lxx. used this very expression to signify 
uncertainty.” ALFoRD. ‘These arguments seem 
conclusive. They are received also by Billr. and 
Neander, and are virtually advanced by Kling, 
in the Ist Ed. President Wolsey, in his very 
carefully digested articles on Divorce, in the New 
Englander for Jan., Ap. and July, 1867, which 
are well worthy of study on this whole subject, 
says of’ the attempt to make this a dissuasive 
against separation: ‘Logic will not bend to this 
meaning.” Words., Barnes and Hodge, how- 
ever, do not admit their force. The latter says, 
‘it is contrary to the whole animus of the Apos- 
tle. He is evidently laboring throughout these 
verses to prevent all unnecessary disruptions of 
social ties.” No such special pleading, however, 
is apparent. If there be a point aimed at, it 
would seem rather to be to put the believer in 
the highest spiritual condition preparatory to 
the coming of Christ, that his obligations pre- 
viously incurred would admit of. And this libe- 
ration from the bondage of a heathen partner, 
‘who has departed,’ is one of the blessings he 
secures. Yet it must be added, that while the 
grammatical argument, and some of the logical 
bearings, support Kling’s view, the sentiment 
involved in the other interpretation is thoroughly 
Scriptural (1 Pet. iii. 1, 2), and is favored by most 
interpreters because of its gracious tone. Most 
of the Homiletical and Practical remarks cited 
in this section proceed upon it. ] 

Oss. 1. Our passage, especially ver. 15, forms, 
as is well known, the Scripture ground for divorce 
on account of malicious desertion. But the sup- 
port given is not direct or absolutely reliable. 
The Apostle is here speaking only of mixed mar- 
riages, in which the will of the unbelieving party 
is the chief thing under consideration. But for 
purely Christian marriages there is no other 
ground allowed in Scripture for divorce but 
adultery or fornication, which is an actual rup- 
ture of the marriage tie. The only question 
therefore is, whether the language of Christ is 
to be interpreted as giving a law literally and 
universally obligatory, or only laying down a 
principle which admits of being applied analogi- 
cally, so that other circumstances also that are 
in fact a breaking of the bond, may be taken as 
furnishing good ground for divorce. In the latter 
case, malicious desertion would very properly be 
regarded as one of these circumstances. 

Oss. 2. In regard to the phrase, ‘is not under 
bondage’ (ver. 15), the question arises, whether, 
according to the intent of the Apostle, a second 
marriage is allowed or forbidden. The words 
themselves express neither the one nor the other, 
and it is altogether arbitrary to supply the 
clause: ‘but let her remain unmarried,’ from 
ver. 11. Rather we may say with Meyer: ‘ Be- 
cause Paul does not apply our Lord’s prohibi- 
tion of divorce to mixed marriages, he does not 
intend also to apply his prohibition of a second 
marriage in Matth. y. 22 to such cases.” 

[‘‘ Although a Christian may not put away his 
wife, being an unbeliever, yet if the wife desert 
her husband, he may contract a second mar- 
riage. Hence even Romish divines declare that 
in this case marriage is not indissoluble. Thus 
A. Lapide says here: ‘Observe that the Apostle 
in this case not only permits divorce of bed 


γε Ὁ 


CHAP. VII. 12-24. 





(thori divortium), but also of matrimony; so that 
the believing spouse is at liberty to contract a 
second marriage. Otherwise a brother or sister 
would be subject to servitude. Anditis a great 
servitude to be held fast in matrimony, bound to 
an unbeliever; so that even though the latter 
desert you, you are not able to marry again, but 
must contain yourself and lead a single life.’ 
And in support of this opinion he refers to St. 
Augustine, de Adulterinis Conjugiis, c. 13 and 19. 
St. Thomas and Ambrosiast., who says: ‘The 
respect of a spouse is not due to him who con- 
temns the Author of marriage, but a person is 
at liberty to unite himself to another.’’’ Worps., 
who singularly contradicts this view inyhis com- 
ments on the next verse ]. Ψ 

Ver. 17. If not to each one as the Lord 
hath distributed, each one, as God hath 
called, so let him walk.—tThere are two 
points here in regard to which commentators 
differ: 1. The connection with what precedes, 
formed by εἰ μῆ; 2. The relation of the parallel 
clauses, beginning with o¢: as,—whether they 
express essentially the same idea or different 
ideas. As it respects the second point, it is clear 
from what is specified in ver. 18ff., that Paul is 
here speaking of that position in life in which 
each one finds himself when called to be a Chris- 
tian. The first of these clauses, then, designates 
this position as a lot appointed to each one by 
the Lord [‘‘it is a dramatic metaphor, which 
‘will bring to mind a celebrated passage in Ham- 
let.” BuoomFiELD]; the second, as a position in 
_ which he received his call to salvation. It is 
to this position that the particles ‘‘as” and “so” 
refer. The two clauses, then, are not tautologi- 
cal. The use of the title ‘Lord,’ in connection 
with ‘distributeth’ (ἐμέρισε) is somewhat remark- 
able, since Paul generally employs this title of 
Christ. From this fact we are to explain the 
change of place between the two words, ‘the 
Lord’ and ‘God’ in the received text; since the 
former would rather be regarded as the sub- 
ject of the verb ‘call,’ although the act of call- 
_ing is also frequently referred back to God. 
This difficulty has led some to regard “ gifts’ as 
the implied object of ‘distributed,’ ἡ, e., the 
higher and Divinely-conferred qualifications for 
the state and calling of individuals (comp. ver. 
7). Thus Osiander, Bengel, and others. But 
in ver. 7, the gift, which would then be treated 
of here, is referred back to God; and in the ex- 
position which follows, so far from there being 
any hint of this, one would rather suppose that 
‘Lord’ was to be taken as synonymous with 
‘God.’ This might be explained on the score of 
a wish merely to change the form of expression, 
and of the fact that Paul was here speaking of 
the act of Lordship. The explanation of Reiche, 
who refers the words, ‘‘as the Lord hath distri- 
buted,” to the beneficence of Christ (comp. 
Meyer, ed. 3), is neither supported by the con- 
text nor warranted by the position they occupy 
before the words, ‘as God hath called.’ 

In respect to the first point, however, viz: the 
connection of this verse with the preceding by 
et 4, it must be confessed that an explanation 
altogether satisfactory does not exist. If we 
supply χωρίζεται from ver. 15, or σώσεις from ver. 
16, then it would have read: εἰ δὲ μή, or εἰ δὲ Kal 


᾿" 


161 


ee 
μή, and this would be a decided objection, apart 
from all other considerations arising from the 
unsuitableness of the idea obtained, viz: ‘but if 
she should not depart,’ or: ‘if thou dost not 
save her.’—If, again, we join εἰ yy to what. di- 
rectly precedes, making it mean, or not, this 
would be both ungrammatical (hence the varia- 
tion ἢ #7), and would only weaken the force of 
the question,—If, moreover, we should refer the 
clause εἰ μή---ὁ κύριος to the preceding words, 
this would be to rend asunder parallel clauses 
most unjustifiably, and the consequent explana- 
tion, nist prout quemque Dominus adjuverit, would 
be both flat and inconsistent with the meaning 
of the words themselves. Totake εἰ μῇ ἃ5 equiva- 
lent to ἀλλά, is contrary to usage.—If we render 
the words by: ‘only,’ then there is no suitable 
connection with the foregoing sentence; for to 
go back, as de Wette does, to ‘is not bound’ 
would he a very questionable overleaping of 
what intervened. But, not to say anything of 
the fact that it does indeed serve for the confir- 
mation of οὐ δεδούλωται, yet it does not suit, inas- 
much as the contents of ver. 17 would then be 
put in entire contradiction to the above state- 
ment (ov dedov.). We should then be obliged to 
supply some phrase like this: ‘in case that con- 
dition, viz: the departure of the unbelieving 
party, does not occur.’ It still remains for us, 
with Grotius and Meyer, to attach εἰ jf to ver. 
16, in the sense of except, or unless, and to supply 
οἴδατε, you know, from 16: ‘unless ye (know 
this, your obligation), let every one walk, ete.’ 
How hard this construction is, every one can 
perceive; where, instead of going straight on 
with the words: ‘that it is necessary for us so 
to walk as God hath called each one,’ we have 
the abrupt introduction of the imperative form. 
Besides, there arises also an incongruity between 
the contents of ver. 16 and ver. 17. (See what 
has been observed above). We prefer here to 
allow a (philological) non-liquet, and accept 
Bengel’s translation, which is most in accordance 
with the course of thought: ‘if this be not so, 
otherwise (ceteroquin).” We might, perhaps, 
take εἰ μῇ in the sense of 7f not, and understand 
it to imply: ‘provided no element comes in to 
destroy the purpose of the Divine calling’ (ver. 
15), as in the case mentioned,—the desertion of 
the unbelieving party. [Is it not, after all, the 
simplest method to consider this as resuming 
the implication of the previous question, and 
making it the basis of the following injunction, g.d. 
‘How knowest thou whether thou wilt convert 
thy husband? If not, if thou canst not know 
this fact, then let each one go quietly on his 
course, as the Lord has marked it out for him in 
his Providence. If it be to be deserted and left 
alone, let him accept that destiny, and not fight 
against it to the aggravation of all difficulties.’ 
In such a view of the words we have no need of 
inserting a δέ. We would no more need itin Greek 
than in English. The argument is here on the 
rapids, and its flow is far from smooth]. 

[As to the two clauses, they are, as Kling as- 
serts, by no means tautological, but seem to im- 
ply more than he states. In the first, Paul con- 
fines himself to the allotment of Providence in 
the case of desertion. But he at once recollects 
himself, as standing upon a broad principle, ap- 


152 





plicable not only to the parties directly in view, 
and their particular allotments (ἐμέρισεν), but 
also to all conditions and callings in life (κέκληκε). 
And here we see the reason why, in the first in- 
stance, he uses the term ὁ κύριος, the Lord, evi- 
dently referring to Christ. Τὸ the deserted one 
he intimates that it is the dear Saviour after all 
that rules in the lot, and it is not contrary to his 
or her salvation. It is a touch of tenderness. 
But when at once his view expands to all voca- 
tions and conditions of humanity, he uses the 
more seemingly universal epithet, God (ὁ ϑέος). 
And then it was natural for him to add]—and 
so I ordain in all churches.—He here shows 
the great breadth of the principle he enjoined, 
and the emphasis he put uponit. It was nothing 
framed for the case of the Corinthians alone, but 
ran through all his teachings. Hence, they 
were the more bound to abide by it. Each one 
every where was to continue walking (περιπατεῖν) 
in that course of life, and in that outward state, 
where Christianity found him. This thought af- 
terwards is more definitely expressed by pévevv. 
‘“‘Here we learn the general fact that Christi- 
anity does not disturb existing relations, so far 
as they are not sinful, but only aims to infuse 
into them a new spirit. Hence, it opposes every 
thing revolutionary.” NEANDER. 

Vers. 18, 19. Has any man been called 
who has been circumcised?—In illus- 
trating his general precept, he takes into consi- 
deration, first, the religious position of the indi- 
vidual, with its outward token showing whether 
he was a Jew or not when making a profession 
of Christianity. In the one case, as little as in 
the other, does he approve of a change being at- 
tempted; becauze nothing at all depended upon 
these external signs, but every thing (comp. iii. 
7) upon the keeping of God’s commandments 
(comp. Rom. ii. 25ff.),—upon the faith which 
works by love (Gal. vy. 6). In opposition to the 
externality of such self-chosen God-service he 
insists upon the moral character—the obedience 
that involves faith (comp. 1 Jno. iii. 28) as that 
which alone has or imparts value for the king- 
dom of God (comp. Calvin and Osiander). In 
ver. 18, as also afterwards in ver. 21, some take 
the clauses to be questions; others as hypotheti- 
cal statements. The latter isthe more emphatic. 
Yet we might also regard them as direct asser- 
tions, as for example: ‘“‘There is one who has 
been called, etc., let him not become uncircum- 
cised.” The word ἐπισπᾶσϑαι denotes the draw- 
ing of the prepuce again over the glands—its 
artificial restoration which was effected by a 
surgical operation. This was often practised by 
the Jews of a later time, both when they lapsed 
into paganism, and when, from shame or fear of 
the heathen, in times of persecution, they wished 
to hide their nationality, and, also, when they 
appeared naked as combatants in public sports 
(comp. 1 Mace. i. 15; Josernus Antiq. xii. 5, 1; 
and Sisxerr Stud. and Crit., 1885, p. 657 ff.). 


Such were called O95 2), recutiti. A like 


measure must have been resorted to by the Co- 
rinthian Jewish converts, who wished not to be 
behind the converts from heathenism in their 
entire abandonment of the law, and who, there- 
fore, wished to wipe out all trace of Judaism 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


-““π, ἄρ, 
from their persons.—Was any one called in 
uncircumcision—év ἀκροβυστίᾳ, as in 
Rom. iv. 10 (comp. Acts xv. 1). The desire of 
the heatken converts to become circumcised we 
are to regard as a Jewish reaction against all 
such Hellenism. Both vv. 18 and 19 are asyn- 
detic by way of giving life and emphasis to the 
style—Let him not be circumcised. The 
circumcision is nothing, and the uncir- 
cumcision is nothing, but keeping of the 
commandments of God.—[Supply: ‘that, 
indeed, is something, yea, every thing.’ ‘In this, 
as in the two exactly parallel passages, Gal. y. 
6, and vi. 15, the first clause is the same. ‘Cir- 
cumcision availeth nothing, nor uncircumcision;’ 
thus asserting the two sides of the Apostle’s 
principle of indifference to the greatest of the 
Jewish ceremonies, exemplified in his conduct b 

the circumcision of Timotheus on the one hand, 
and by the refusal to circumcise Titus on the 
other. The peculiar excellence of the maxim is 
its declaration, that those who maintain the ab- 
solute necessity of rejecting forms, are as much 
opposed to the freedom of the Gospel, as those 
who maintain the absolute necessity of retaining 
them. In contradistinction to this positive or 
negative ceremonialism, he gives, in the several 
clauses of each of these texts, his description of 
what he maintains to be really essential. The 
variation of the three passages thus become ya- 
luable, as exhibiting in their several forms the 
Apostle’s view of the essentials of Christianity— 
‘Keeping the commandments of God,’ ‘Faith 
working by love,’ ‘A new creature.’ These de- 
scribe the same threefold aspect of Christianity 
with regard to man, which, in speaking of God, 
is described under the names of the Father, the 
Son, and the Spirit. In this passage, where 
man is viewed chiefly in his relation to the na- 
tural order of the world, the point which the 
Apostle wished to impress upon his hearers was, 
that in whatever station of life they were, it was 
still possible to observe the ‘commandments of 
God’ (perhaps with an implied reference to the 


two great commandments, Matth. xxii. 836-39). ἢ 


In the two passages in the Epistle to the Gala- 
tians (ver. 6; vi. 15), the more distinct refer- 
ence to faith in Christ, and to the new creation 


wrought by His Spirit, is brought out by the . 


more earnest and impassioned character of the 
argument.’”? STANLEY ]. 

Vers. 20-22. Each one in the calling in 
which he is called, in this let him abide. 
—Paul here goes back to his general rule, thus 
finishing up the special application in yer. 18, 
and introducing another illustration. The de- 
monstrative, ‘in ‘this,’ comes in by way of em- 
phasis. The κλῆσις, however, does not denote 
vocation, a position tn life determined by the Di- 
vine Providence; for it nowhere else occurs with 
this meaning. (In Dion. H. the word κλήσεις is 
used to denote the distinctions among the citi- 
zens at Rome, ὦ. e., classes, which, however, does 
not mean the same thing). Rather we might 
say, with Bengel, that it denotes ‘the state in 
which the Divine calling finds one, which is in- 
star vocationis: as a calling.” [‘*As he was 
called, so let him remain.” Ropinson], But as 
applied, usage is against it. In the New Testa- 
ment κλῆσις is uniformly used to denote the call- 


GHAP. VII. 12-24. 


a ““--ς-ς-ς-Ὁ-Θ-ς-ς-.ς-Ἐ--ς--- ς΄ ες  ς-ο--ς---- 


ing or invitation unto God’s Kingdom. This 
goes out broadly to all men, of every condition 
in life, addressing them as they are. It says, 
‘thou circumcised one, thou uncircumcised, thou 
slave, thou freeman, believe on the Lord Jesus !’ 
It takes the man, therefore, as he is, in his own 
peculiar position in society, and in this way 
designates this position as compatible with 
Christianity, and capable of being sanctified by 
it. Hence, no surrender of it is required. On 
the contrary, the injunction is to abide therein. 
So we at last reach the above-mentioned sense of 
the word, but not in such a way as to imply that 
κλῆσις carries in itself this signification of a pe- 
culiar vocation. [Of course the injunction here 
given is supposed to be limited by the obvious 
consideration that there is nothing in the per- 
son’s condition which is inconsistent with the 
Divine vocation. If there be, a change will be 
necessitated. |—As a slave art thou called.— 
After specifying in ver. 18 the religious distinc- 
tion, which divided the entire human race at that 
time in respect to its outward token, and pro- 
nouncing it indifferent in relation to the kingdom 
of God, he comes now to the great distinction 
that existed in social life,—that between slaves 
and freemen, and affirms that a position of ser- 
vitude even is by no means inconsistent with 
that of a Christian, and, therefore, that the slave, 
who becomes a heliever, need not be troubled 
about changing his outward state.—Let it not 
concern you—i. e., as though you, in this ex- 
ternal bondage, could not, as a Christian, and as 
a freeman, pray or serve God; and must be cur- 
tailed of your Christian rights.—But if also 
thou art able to become free, use it rather, 
—aAha εἰ καὶ δύνασαι ελεύϑερος yevé- 
σϑαι, μᾶλλον χρῆσαι. The meaning here 
is much disputed. Somesupplement χρῆσαι with 
τῇ ἐλευϑερίᾳ, from ελεύϑερος, take ἀλλά as equi- 
valent to: ‘but’ (aber), and attach καὶ, not to 
the whole sentence, but to ελεύϑερος, and trans- 
late: ‘but if thou mayest in any way also be- 
come free, use this freedom rather.’ But against 
this it is justly objected: 1. that καὶ ought in 
that case to stand before ελεύϑερος, and 2. that 
what immediately precedes and what follows 
(ver. 22), as well as the scope of the whole 
clause, does not indicate that he is exhorting the 
slave to seek a change in condition. Rather the 
whole drift of the argument is the other way— 
to make men content with their lot, and so favors 
the other explanation, that which regards ἀλλά 
as equivalent to: sondern, on the contrary, and 
ei kai to mean: even though, and makes the being 
called as a slave, the object of χρῆσαι; and then 
translates: ‘but even though thou mayest be 
made free, use your servitude rather, [as a 
means of discipline, and an opportunity for glo- 
rifying God by showing fidelity therein]. It 
may be said, indeed, that this conflicts with the 
_ general spirit of the Apostle. But in opposition 
to this Meyer justly observes: that the advice to 
improve opportunities for becoming free, which 
was rendered unimportant and trivial by the an- 
ticipation of the speedy advent of Christ, was, 
on the other hand, by no means incompatible 
with the exalted idea of Paul, that all men were 
one in Christ (Gal. iii. 28), and that in Christ 
the slave was free, and the freeman was a slave 


153 





(ver. 22). Compare also Bengel (who adds ex- 
planatorily: for he, who might become free, has 
a kind master, whom it were better to serve than 
to seek other avocations, 1 Tim. vi. 2, comp. ver. 
22: and sets aside the apparent contradiction 
between this and ver. 23, by saying: it is not 
said then, ‘be not,’ but ‘become not the servants 
of men’), and Osiander, who, in the end, ob- 
serves, that the severity of the advice becomes 
moderated by the consideration of the very tole- 
rable condition of slaves in the civilized States 
of Greece, where, in many respects, they enjoyed 
the protection of law, and the masters did not 
have the power of life and death over them. 
‘“‘The question assumes a different aspect alto- 
gether in the slave States of North America; for 
there the slaves are prevented from becoming 
Christians, and in this way good care is taken 
that the fundamental principles respecting the 
position of Christian slaves cannot come into ap- 
plication. And this is one of the most frightful 
violations of Christian principle.” Burczr. 
[Thank God! we can put this into the past tense 
now |.* 

For the slave who was called in the 
Lord is a freeman of the Lord, in like 
manner he who was called as a freeman 
is a slave of Christ.—The advice just given, 
is here sustained by a general truth, aod the 
person who was called as a slave is comforted in 





*[Stanley’s comment is too important not to be given en- 
tire. “The question here is, whether to understand éAev- 
θερίᾳ or δουλείᾳ after χρῆσαι: whether the sense is, ‘Take 
advantage of the offer of freedom ;’ or ‘Remain in slavery, 
though the offer is made.’ It is one of the most evenly ba- 
lanced questions in the interpretation of the New Testa- 
ment. 1. χρῆσαι may either be ‘choose,’ or ‘make use of,’ 
although it leans rather to the former, and thus favors the 
first interpretation. 2. εἰ καί may either be, ‘If, besides, 
thou hast the offer; or ‘ Even if thou hast the offer,’ although 
it leans rather to the latter, and thus favors the second in- 
terpretation. The sense of this particular verse favors the 
first: for, unless the Apostle meant to make an exception 
to the rule which he was laying down, why should he in- 
troduce this clause at all? The sense of the general con- 
text is in favor of the second; for why should the Apostle 
needlessly point out an exception to the principle of acqui- 
escence in existing conditions of life, which he is so strongly 
recommending? The language and practice of the Apostle 
himself, as described in the Acts, favor the first interpreta- 
tion; 6. 9.. his answer at Philippi, ‘they have beaten us 
without a trial, and imprisoned us, being Roman citizens; 
He eo nay, let them come themselves and take us out,’ 
(Acts xvi 37); and to the tribune at Jerusalem, ‘but I was 
free born’ (Acts xxii. 28). The general feeling of the 
Church, as implied in the Epistles and in this passage, fa- 
vors the second interpretation ; it would hardly have seemed 
worth while to grasp at freedom in the presence of the ap- 
proaching dissolution of all things; and the apparent pre- 
ference thus given to slavery may be explained on the same 
grounds (see vv. 29, 30) as the apparent preference given to 
celibacy. The commentators before the Reformation have 
chiefly been in favor of the second; since, in favor of the 
first; but Chrysostom observes that, in his time, there were 
some who adopted the view favorable to liberty; as, there 
have been some Protestant divines (e. g., Luther) who have 
adopted the view favorable to slavery. On the whole, the 
probability seems slightly to incline to the second; and the 
whole passage is then expressive of comfort to the slave 
under his hard lot, with which the Apostle sympathizes, 
and which he tenderly alleviates (as in Philem. 16, 17), 
though not wishing him to leave it. And if, as is possible, 
the prospect of liberty, to which the Apostle alludes, arose 
from the fact of the master being a Christian, this sense of 
the passage would be still further illustrated and confirmed 
by 1 Tim. vi. 2: ‘Let not [the slaves] that have believing 
masters despise them, because they are brethren, but rather 
serve them’ (ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον δουλενέτωσαν)." Calvin, Beza, 
Grotius, Hammond, Hodge. Baries. and most English com- 
mentators, declare decidedly for th» first view; but the 
best modern German Exe etes, de Wette, Meyer and others, 
follow the early Grees Fathe.s in adopting the second]. 


154 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a a a a a a a a en La gt OE 


respect to his condition. The Apostle shows how 
the converted slave must estimate his relation to 
Christ, viz., as swallowing up all the evils of his 
earthly lot, and conferring on him a blessed 
emancipation; and how the freeman has to re- 
gard his relation to Christ, viz., as one that puts 
him under obligations to obey. Mark the con- 
nection hetween the phrases ‘in the Lord’ and 
‘of the Lord.’—By ‘called in the Lord,’ he signi- 
fies either, that. which the calling involves, ὃ, e., 
to be in Christ; or, what is simpler, the Being 
in whom the call is grounded. Or it may even 
denote the sphere in which the-calling is to be 
fulfilled—the element in which the person called 
is to live. Hence it may be equivalent to: has 
become a Christian.—In the expression: ‘the 
Lord’s freeman,’ the Lord will, of course, not be 
understood as the person who had liberated the 
individual in question from His own service; 
since it was in Satan’s service that he was pre- 
viously bound, but as the one to whom he be- 
longed in consequence of his liberation from the 
yoke of the other, and for which he was under 
deep obligations to his deliverer. Yet he belongs 
to Christ, not as a slave, but as a freeman, since 
in the sphere of Christ there is liberty (comp. 2 
Cor. iii. 17; Jno. viii. 82, 36); there all slavery 
is done away, and the persons so liberated become 
His possession.—Of course the freedom here 
spoken of is moral and religious freedom—deli- 
verance from the bonds of guilt, and from the 
power of sin; just as in the antithesis, the ser- 
vitude meant isa state of moral and religious 
obligation to Christ—of absolute inward depen- 
dence on His grace and will. The points here 
contrasted belong together, as complements of 
each other (comp. Rom. vi. 16ff.). ‘‘ Hence the 
distinction between master and slave is here 
virtually obliterated. To be the Lord’s freeman, 
and to be the Lord’s slave, are the same thing. 
The Lord’s freeman is one whom the Lord has 
redeemed from Satan, and made His own; and 
the Lord’s slave is also one whom Christ has 
purchased for Himself. So that master and 
slave stand on the same level before Christ. 
Comp. Eph. vi. 9.” Hopes. } 

Vers. 28, 24. Ye were bought with a 
price.—The thought ‘of belonging to Christ 
leads to the ground of this relation, viz., the 
purchase of the believer by Him (comp. vi. 
20).—From this the exhortation follows, not to 
be faithless to the obligation thus imposed, by 
coming under servitude to men.—become not 
the servants of men.—As the transition to 
the plural shows, he is here addressing the Cor- 
inthians at large. What he dissuades them from, 
is not simply men-pleasing in general, and eompli- 
ance with their immoral demands; nor yet undue 
attachment to human guides; but rather such a 
subserviency to popular opinion as would cause 
them to seek a change in their éxternal social 
position (so Fritzsche and Meyer). Paul is here 
showing the Christian slaves a trace of freedom, 
even under their outward yoke. The slaves who 
are obedient to their masters for the Lord’s sake 
(1 Pet. ii. 13), belongintruth to no man. Hence, 
no Christian, dearly purchased and called from 
sin, death and the devil, to true liberty, should 
make himself so dependent on man, as to imagine 
that he was not really free, even though he had 


a master over him (Besser).—Less.in accordance 
with the immediate connection Osiander says: 
‘“‘No one should abrogate his true freedom, or 
his true subjection, by sacrificing his faith te 
unbelieving masters or companions.” To sup- 
pose a reference here to slaves, implying that 
they should not serve men merely (Eph. vi. 6); 
or to freemen, that they should not dispose of 
their liberty;* or, which would be better, that 
they should not become morally subject to men, 
is unwarranted.—The whole digression from ver. 
17 [entered upon by way of illustration], he 
concludes with an exhortation essentially the 
same as in ver. 20.—Wherein each one was 
called, brethren, in that let him remain 
with God,—Here also the emphasis is on the 
words ‘“‘in that” (ἐν τούτῳ); and its antecedent 
denotes that relation in life which a person occu- 
pied when called. The adjunct ‘with God’ 
(παρὰ ϑεῷ) is somewhat peculiar. It may mean: 
directing his mind towards God as in His pre 
sence (Ξεξἐνώπιον τοῦ ϑεοῦ) ; or: as in God’s sight, 
tanquam in spectante Deo, (Grotius); (comp. Ps, 
xxiii. 2; Eph. vi. 6), or: in communioh with 
God. The injunction would then be: ‘let every 
one continue in his original condition and rela. 
tions; and yet so conduct his affairs as not to 
disturb his fellowship with God in them.’ The 
last interpretation is undoubtedly to be preferred 
as introducing a new thought. more definitely, 
and such a one too as refers that which is hinted 
at in ver. 23, to its proper connection with the 
absolute principle of Christian life. [**To live 
near to God is, therefore, the Apostle’s prescrip 
tion both for peace and holiness.” Hopgz.] 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Christianity as the absolute religion is distin- 
guished by the fact, that it takes up into its own 
sphere every legitimate occupation or function 
in life; and either ennobles it by its sanctifying 
power, or allows it as something indifferent, so 
far as its spiritual work is concerned. The con- 
trasts in religion between Jews and Heathen, 
externally symbolized by circumcision and uncir- 
cumcision, vanish in the Christian sphere; there 
the only thing which is held valfd and imparts 
value, is the entering of man, with his entire 


personality, into holy covenant with God. This 


takes place by faith—faith which works by 
love; so that the uncircumcised, who is thus 
found in faith, is like to the cireumcised, whoin 
like manner believes. Hence, neither the one 
nor the other has any reason for passing out 
from his own state into that of the other; as 
though circumcision, the token of bondage to 
the law, were unworthy of a Christian who has 
been freed from the law; or as though uncir- 
cumcision, the sign of a position outside the 
covenant and promise, were a hinderance to a 
participation in the same.—The contrasts also 
of civil life, suck as those which exist between 
the slave and the free, likewise vanish, so far as 
it respects the inward life. The slave, as be- 


*(“ The practice of selling one’s self was fr qnent in creat 
slave markets, such as must Rave been at Corinth.” 
STANLEY. But this plainly could not be the thing referred 


to here. Though Hammond, A. Clarke and others so com — 


strue the passage.]} 


_~_ 


CHAP. VII. 12-.24, 


155 


i 


longing to Christ, is a freeman, bound only in- 
wardly to Christ, whom he serves in everything 
which he has either to do or suffer in his posi- 
tion; since he does and suffers everything for 
His sake, or because it is the will of his Lord 
that he should do and suffer that which his po- 
sition involves, and thus should honor Him, and 
prove that communion with Christ makes a ser- 
vant faithful and zealous. On the other hand, 
the freeman, as a Christian, is bound to Christ; 
his acts proceed not from'caprice, but in constant 
‘subjection to Christ’s will. Asa person who is 
outwardly dependent on another, is a freeman 
when in communion with Christ, since in his de- 
votion to Christ, all dependence upon other men 
is done away; so is the person who is outwardly 
independent of another, made a servant by his 
connection with Christ, since in his entire de- 
pendence on Christ, all arbitrariness, arising 
from his outward independence, is removed. 
Thus are both essentially alike; and the slave 
has no reason to strive after a change of his ex- 
ternal position, as if his dignity as.a free Chris- 
tian man were conditioned upon it. 

It is altogether another thing, however, when 
within the limits of Christendom a mighty irre- 
pressible reaction arises against slaveholding, 
on the part of such as wish to be Christians, and 
to be counted a part of Christendom. For men 
who are destined one day to have part in Christ, 
the Son of Man, the Saviour of all (even though 
they have not as yet any actual part in Him), 
are even, on this account, bound to have their 
personality respected, and are not to be treated 
always as chattels.. It is inconsistent, therefore, 
with the spirit of Christianity, for such as pass 
for Christians, to presume on perpetuating bon- 
dage; and Christendom ought not to rest until it 
has wiped out this stain. For such has been 
the tendency of the Gospel from the beginning. 
Ever since the first centuries, in proportion as 
Christianity has gained the ascendency, has it 
operated more and more to put an end to 
slavery. 

2. Christian Freedom.—There is something 
great in the freedom of a Christian, into which he 
has been lifted by faith—a freedom wherein he 
is freed from all things, and is independent of all, 
and yet, through love, is the servant of all. (See 
Luther’s remarkable treatise, which has this 
title). In that faith, which apprehends the eternal 
word of God, and beholds the unseen and future 
world disclosed therein, he acquires the pilgrim- 
sense, which looks on the fashion of this world 
as passing away, and keeps from all entangle- 
ment in its business, in its connections and pos- 
sessions, in its use and enjoyment; nor allows 
himself to be captivated by it. Yet, on the 
other hand, so long as he is outwardly occupied 
with it, he overlooks or neglects nothing; but 
rather bestows upon it all requisite duty, care, 
and oversight; attending to it, while he stands 
inwardly about it. His chief occupation, viz: his 
care for the kingdom of God and for a participa- 
tion in it, he in no way suffers to be disturbed; 
and, for the sake of the highest good, he is al- 
ways ready to sacrifice everything else, however 
dear; indeed, in all his having, and holding, and 
using, he is intent only upon how he can serve 
the Lord, further His ends, prove himself to be 








His follower, and do every thing in His nama 
and to his honor (x. 31. Col. iii. 17).—So also in 
marriage he aims at the same thing, by his ten- 
der solicitude for his wife, by pious domestic 
discipline, by acquisition of a livelihood, by skill 
and fidelity in the use and enjoyment of tem- 
poral goods, by moderation, beneficence, ete. 
The same holds good, also, of joy and sorrow, 
and of the various experiences arising from the 
vicissitudes of life. In this also does the Chris- 
tian maintain his inward freedom. Not that he: 
is devoid of feeling—not that he affects a stoical. 
apathy; rather, in the midst of deep emotions, 
his aim is to preserve a mastery over self, and 
keep composed in God; so that joy ever resolves 
itself into filial gratitude; and pain, into filial. 
resignation; he is enthralled by no affections,, 
he is carried away by no passionate desires. 

[3. Importance of unity of religious faith tm: 
married life—According to its true ideal, mar- 
riage is the union of a man and woman in their: 
entire personalities, and for their entire earthly- 
existence. Being mutual complements of each. 
other, they combine to form a larger and com-- 
plex whole; ‘‘for they are no more twain but: 
one flesh.” But in order to the perfection and: 
harmony of this union, and for the fulfilment of’ 
ends for which it was instituted, it is necessary- 
that there be a prevailing fellowship in thought 
and feeling, in ends and aims, in interests and! 
pursuits, not only in respect to their natural, but 
also in respect to their spiritual life. Thus only 
can. their influence on each other be kindly, and 
they prove mutual helpers in joy and sorrow, in 
cares and labors; thus only can they properly 
contribute to the happy development of each 
other’s character, and suitably codperate for the 
training of their children and management of 
their household; thus only can that good be 
realized, in all its fulness, which was. contem- 
plated when it was ordained that ‘man should. 
not live alone.’ 

It follows, therefore, that precisely to the ex- 
tent that the fellowship above spoken of fails, 
there will bea lack of sympathy and codperation, 
and occasion furnished for alienation, strife and. 
separation. The perfect oneness of the flesh is. 
in danger of being interrupted and. broken, 
when there is not also oneness of spirit. And to, 
such eviland bitter consequences do those Chris- 
tians expose themselves who become voluntarily 
allied in marriage to the children of this world.. 
Supposing their faith sincere, the bond which 
unites them to their partners can only be the: 
lower one of the natural life. In all their 
deeper experiences, in all their more important 
hopes and aims, there is essential and irrecon- 
cilable antagonism. ‘For what fellowship hath. 
righteousness with unrighteousness? and what. 
communion hath light with darkness ? and what 
concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part. 
hath he that believeth with an infidel? and what. 
agreement hath the temple of God with idols?” 
Harmony, in such cases, can be preserved only 
by ‘‘agreement to disagree,’ or by an incotsis- 
tent and irksome compliance of each with the 
wishes of the other in the greater part of those 
pursuits and pleasures which involve their com- 
mon action, And when there is not in the 
worldling a conviction of the superior worth of 


156 





religion, and a considerate affection, which teler- 
ates what it cannot share in, the effect upon the 
religious life of the other can only be disastrous. 
Instead of that kindly sympathy and furtherance 
so needful to the cultivation of piety, there is 
perpetual obstruction interposed in the way of 
every higher duty. Household religion becomes 
impossible. And so also the religious instruc- 
tion and training which the Christian parent 
would exercise upon the children, is neutralized 
by the irreligious example of the other. 

For such evil results there can be no responsi- 
bility incurred when conversion has taken place 
after marriage. But those who have vobuntarily 
hazarded them under earthly inducements must 
bear the burden of the blame and take the con- 
sequences, as the penalty for consenting to be 
unequally yoked, contrary to the very nature of 
the marriage rite. For the Christian the condi- 
tion of a blessed marriage is, ‘‘in the Lord.” 
This is at once highest reason and Divine pre- 


cept]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[Ver. 12-24. This section shows I. the method 
in which Christianity entered into, and revolutionized 
human society. 1. It assailed no existing social 
institutions from without; marriages, callings, 
conditions were to remain as they were. 2. It 
wrought from within, sanctifying and ennobling 
the individual character. 3. It employed the 
existing bonds of society, as conductors through 
which to diffuse its saving power—sanctifying 
wives through husbands, and husbands through 
wives; children through parents, and parents 
through children, and even servants through 
masters, and masters through servants. 4. It 
aimed at the preservation of peace, as far as 
possible, in consistency with being in God. 5. 
It ignored outward distinctions—counting the ex- 
ternal condition as of little moment, in compari- 
‘son with the inward state. 7. It begot content- 
ment with the outward estate, by imparting a 
blessing which more than counterbalanced all 
earthly ill. 8. It reconciled the opposite poles 
of human condition, freedom and obligation in 
the love it engendered, making the slave a free- 
man, and putting the freeman under obligations 
‘to serve, and making all alike free, and alike 
obligated. And 9, It placed all in the presence 
of God, in whose sight it constrained believers to 
live; whose honor it urged all to subserve; and 
from whom it invited all to derive their chief 
good. II. The true mode of preaching the Gospel. 
It is 1, to bring the individual to believe in, love 
and serve the Lord; 2, to teach him how to im- 
prove the circumstances of his condition to the 
«liscipline and improvement of his character; 3, 
to show him how he is to make the very evils 
that press upon him a means for illustrating the 
greater power of the Gospel, and for promoting 
the glory of God.] 

Starke (Hepinaer):—1. To the pure all 
things are pure (Titus i. 15). As it does not in- 
jure a pious man to dwell under godless rulers, 
0 also does it not injure a believer to dwell with 
a heathen wife, [i. 6., in case he finds himself 
iving with her when called, and she consent to 
dwell with him without interfering with his reli- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








" 


gious obligations]. 2. Where married people 
profess one Christ and one Gozpel, and yet, one 
party, if not both, cleave to the world, there 
is then certainly an. occasion for exercising 
patience and charity, ver. 12,13. And 3. If one 
of the married parties is a believer, then is the 
other party sanctified by the communion of the 
marriage state, and the children are holy in vir. 
tue of that gracious covenant which God has in- 
stituted with believers and their seed. Gen. xxii, 
7. 4. A pious partner may be able to win and 
convert his irreligious companion, by means of 
the word, prayer, and Christian conversation, 
(1 Pet. iii. 14). 5. If one of the married partieg 
becomes faithless, and withdraws from his cove: 
nant, and can be recovered by no instrumentality, 
then is the other party free, and the Church 
authorities themselves declare him free, ver. 15. 
6. It is not enough that married people should 
hold together in friendship and in earthly com- 
munion, but each ought to assist in promoting 
the salvation of the other. ver. 16. SrarKE:— 
Since one condition and calling is in itself the 
same as another before God, it becomes every one 
to be content with ‘whatsoever state he is in.’ 
ver. 17.—We must forget what we were before 
we belonged to Jesus, and think only of how we 
may sanctify our hearts for Him now.—In Christ 
no regard is paid to external conditions, whether 
it be for honor or contempt. Outward circum- 
stances pass for nothing before God; they neither 
hinder nor help in the matter of our eternal sal- 
vation. Acts x. 34. God is no respecter of per- 
sons. ver. 18, 19. It is a glorious proof of the 
préeminence of Christianity, that it adapts itself 
to all nations, communities, ages and conditions 
in life, and is to them what salt and seasoning is 
to our food. ver. 20.—Thou poor man! art thou 
doomed to live in servitude and oppression ; be of 
good comfort! Thou mayest yet please God, and 
attain to everlasting liberty (Eph. vi. 8). ver. 21. 
—To be a servant in the eyes of the world, and 
a freeman in Christ before God, is honor, com- 
fort, and blessedness enough. Gal. iii. 26, 28. 
Hast thou been made free, abuse not thy freedom 
for a cover to iniquity (1 Pet. ii. 16); but serve 
thy Lord, Christ, in righteousness and true holi- 
ness (Tit. ii, 14). ver. 22.—Away with all lords 
and masters, who are opposed to Christ.—Grate- 
fully should we estimate the great benefit of 
freedom of conscience which we have in the 
Evangelical Church, and improve it all the more 
worthily, Phil. i. 27. ver. 23.—Although one 
vocation in life may be subject to more tempta- 
tions than another, yet every one nevertheless 
stands under the providence of God; and if suf- 
ficient care be taken, we can remain with God 
in all. So, then, this remaining with God in 
every calling should be the first thing sought for 
and practised. 1 Pet. i. 15, ver. 24. 

Berens. Bis.:—When married to a heathen, 
or an infidel, a Christian ought simply and ear- 
nestly to consider the providence of God herein, 
and not cut himself loose arbitrarily. Kather ae 
should regard and improve such a state as a 
happy opportunity for exercising the spirit of 
Christ; and to this end he should pray for this 
spirit, and endeavor to convince and win the un- 
converted spouse at least by his good conduct 
alone, if by nothing else.—Thou art not at liberty 


CHAP. VII. 12-24. 





to refrain from any possible means for effecting, 
at least preparatorily or initiatively, the conver- 
sion of thy associate. Since we all belong to 
each other, God uses all conditions and occasions 
for sanctifying one person through another. 
God desires, therefore, that we all aim at this 
point. This is a sacred thing in His sight. 
Therefore our conditions and circumstances are 
wisely ordered with reference to this end.—The 
children are holy. By prayer they are taken from 
Satan and consecrated to God as their rightful 
Lord. vv. 12-14.—Liberty should be enjoyed 
with a readiness to suffer if need be; then it is 
good, and one can accept it. This is better 
than arbitrarily to consent to be a slave.—God 
does not begrudge us peace. But, at all events, 
we are not to think of our own trials, but. to look 
to the sanctification of the other.—Suffering 
comes from sin. If a way, however, is open to 
a better condition, let a person improve it. Not 
that we should shrink from necessity and priva- 
tion; but if God shows a way of escape, let us 
escape; and then be prepared to suffer again, if 
God will.—Where God appoints, there I abide 
in peace. But peace is often lost, simply because 
peopie are not prepared for all circumstances. 
ver. 16.—Each one has his own duties. Hence 
we are not to look upon others. Be thou only 
true on thy part. God wills not that any should 
perish; but, in the apportionment of other mat- 
ters, we must concede to Him His absolute right. 
—Each one stands under the providence of God, 
and as that eye leads, so let each one walk suit- 
ably to his calling, and do nothing in and of 
himself. Let no one undertake anything which 
he is not certain in his own conscience that God 
would have him do. Only on such terms cana 
man be sure of God’s blessing.—In spiritual 
matters we should faithfully follow the prompt- 
ings of the Spirit of God. But in externals, the 
Gospel as little requires us to imitate the ways 
of others, however innocent, as it allows others 
to enforce their ways uponus. All arbitrariness 
is hereby cut off; and our conduct exhibits all 
suitable obedience to God, industry and fidelity, 
submission and patience,—in short the whole 
round of Christian duty towards God, our neighbor 
and ourselves.—On such righteous behaviour in 
our calling, our well-being for time and eternity 
depends. Not that we become blessed through 
such external performances, but our mode of life 
is so closely connected with the spiritual state 
of our souls, that the one cannot exist aright 
without the other. He, who in external matters 
lives disorderly, falsely and iniquitously, cannot 
possibly remain sound and honest within. He 
who, on the contrary, is in heart well ordered, 
governed and protected by God, can also conduct 
himself rightly in external things.—Inward per- 
fection consists in following one’s gifts.—Out- 
ward perfection consists in discharging one’s 
own obligations in such conditions and callings 
as God has placed us in. ver. 17.—Men often 
gladly pass by the essential commands of God, 
and take up some incidental matters as the main 
objects of their regard (comp. Matth. xxiii. 23) ; 
but Paul says: ‘nothing is as you apprehend 
it.’—But to perform the will of God—to be obe- 
dient to His light, and Spirit, and word—this is 
of consequence; and the new creature in Jesus 





157 








Christ is every thing (Gal. vi. 15). ver. 11.— 
Most men make themselves servants to each 
other; but O! let each man recognize the great- 
ness of hisown soul, and what it hascost. It has 
cost the blood and life of God, which is more 
than all the world,—yea, hundred thousand 
worlds. And yet, oftentimes, this soul, so great, 
so noble, is sold for a trifling enjoyment—a little 
piece of foolery.—All those, who in any respect 
act upon Christ, their true pattern, have passed 
into the imagination and thoughts of men, and 
so have become their servants. But so far as 
thou art a servant of men in any other sense, 
thou withholdest from God His due. The Lord 
tolerates no rivals: He also needs no vicegerent, 
nor anything of the sort. He is alone, and there 
is no second. His honor He will give to no other. 
(Is. xii. 8). He is the bridegroom, and to Him 
only the bride shall listen. He is the Lord, and 
to Him only shall men hearken. ver. 23.—So 
great is the value put upon the immortal soul, 
that God takes upon Himself the labor and the 
care of it, calls each one especially out of His 
own free grace, and appoints certain ways and 
methods, in which each one may and should pass 
his life on earth beneficially and well. For this 
also he furnishes all the means requisite, and 
wisely ordains the result; and everything which 
He gives into our hands, He sanctifies to our 
use, if we will but follow Him. But each one 
must be certain of his calling; and in this call- 
ing let him remain and improve his gifts to the 
general good. Let us adorn the place to which 
God has appointed us, so that everything may 
stand and go on well in His house.—Our calling 
and its use must be sanctified by remaining with 
God and in His presence. Apart from this, our 
calling is subject to a curse, although in itself it 
were never so proper and promising. Each one 
must learn to look upon his state and calling 
wisely, and remember how it has become cor- 
rupt in and through the fall, and how the best 
things in life also have become vitiated by a 
will alienated from God, and how much that 
is impure cleaves to most of the modes of life, 
and how all such things continue only under 
the forbearance of a holy and merciful Creator. 
Bethink thyself, accordingly, how humbly and 
worshipfully thou hast to live in thy station 
before God. The blessing to spring from it 
must be sought from God and in communion 
with Him. What comes from God is good, and 
can also transpire in the name of God.—Faith is 
quiet communing with God; and while it is no- 
thing pusillanimous, neither is it at the same 
time audacious. It is God in us.—Were we 
always calm in that position where we happened 
to be, and only sought to fulfil these, the ordi- 
nary duties of a true Christian satisfactorily, 
this would be the best thing for us, and the most 
acceptable to God.—There is no station in which 
one cannot attain to blessedness—in which he 
may not live in God and abide in Him; and this 
we can do through love—an affection which we 
may cherish in all circumstances. 1 Jno, iv. 16. 
Everything then turns on this, that each in his 
own station abide with God and keep near to 
Him. ver. 24. 

RreceR :—VeErs. 20, 21. If God has not allowed 
thine external circumstances to hinder His 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





bringing to thee His heavenly calling, and to 
advance thee thereby to the glorious possession 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, suffer thou not such 
circumstances to hinder thee from walking wor- 
thily in the Gospel, but regard thy station in life 
as a most favorable opportunity for serving the 
will of God in thy day and generation. Do not 
defer the inward duty, viz., obedience to the 
heavenly calling, because of some external cir- 
cumstance. Think not to effect this or that 
change first, but in whatever circumstances God 
summons thee, and deems thee worthy of His 
calling, in those be assured that He will bring 
thee successfully through. Everything turns on 
the amount of light a person has from the Lord, 
to enable him to fulfil his vocation conscientiously, 
and to make it tolerable also for himself. God 
does not advise us to change our external con- 
dition, but to change our hearts. But if any 





light of His presence, let a person therein abide 
with God. 

[Barnes:—Ver. 20, 24. Change in a man’s 
calling should not be made from a slight cause. 
A Christian should not make it unless his former 
calling were wrong, or unless he can by it ex- 
tend his own usefulness. But when that can be 
done he should do it, and do it without delay. 
If the course is wrong, it should be forthwith 
abandoned. No consideration can make it right 
to continue it for a day or an hour; no matter 
what may be the sacrifice of property, it should 
be done. Ifa man is engaged in the slave trade, 
or in smuggling, or in piracy, or highway rob- 
bery, or in the manufacture and sale of poison, it 
should be at once and forever abandoned. And 
in like manner if a young man who is converted 
can increase his usefulness by changing his plan 
of life, it should be done as soon as practica: 


mode of life can be spent with God, and in the | ble.] 


C.—Apostolic counsel in reference to remaining single; a. for the unmarried generally, ὃ. for maidens and 
their fathers, c. for widows. 


CuapTer VII. 25-40. 


Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, 
as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. 


I suppose therefore that 


this is good for the present distress, J say, that it ἰδ good for a man [person, dSpwzw,] 


so to be. 
a wife? seek not a wife. 


Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from 
But and if thou marry, [But if also thou mayest have mar- 


ried]! thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Neverthe- 


less such shall have trouble in the flesh: 


but I spare you. But this I say, brethren, 


the time [henceforth] 7s short [narrowed down]: it remaineth,? [omt, it remaineth, 


insert, in order] that both they that have wives be as though they had none; And 


they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they re- 


joiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not; And they that use this 


world,’ as not abusing [overusing] 7: for the fashion of this world passeth away. 


33 


But I would have you without carefulness. 
things that belong to the Lord, and how he may please‘ the Lord: But he that is 


He that is unmarried careth for the 


married careth for the things that are of the world, and how he may please his wife. 


There is difference also between a wife and a virgin.® 


The unmarried woman careth 


for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that 


is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband. And 


this I speak for your own profit;® not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that 


which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction." 


But if 


any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the 
flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sivneth not: let 


them marry. Nevertheless he that standeth steadfast in his* heart, having no neces- 


sity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will 


keep’ [in order to keep] his virgin, doeth” well. 
marriage" doeth well; but” he that giveth Aer not in marriage doeth” better. 


So then he that giveth her in 
The 


wife is bound by the law" [omit, the law] as long as her husband liveth; but if her 
husband be dead, [sleep, χοιμηϑῇ]} she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; 


only in the Lord. But she is happier [more blessed] if she so abide, after my judg: 


ment: and I think also [om. also] that I [also] have the Spirit of God. 


CHAP. VII. 25-40. 159 





1 Ver. 28.—T'apyons, the Rec has γήμης in conform ty with what follows; the former is better attested [and preferred 
by Alf., Stanley]. Others [D. E. F. G.} read λάβῃς yuvaixa—a gloss [found in Ὁ. E. Εἰ G.]. 
2 Ver. 29.—The various readings are ἐστίν before, or after τὸ λοιπόν ; some repeat ἐστὶν λοιπόν with and without τό. 


The older authorities have to λοιπόν ἐστιν (see Exeget. and Crit.). 


8 Ver. 31.—The Rec. τῷ κόσμῳ, a correction. 
follows). {So A. B. Ὁ. F. G. followed by all good editions]. 


4 Ver. 32, 33.—Apéoer; Lachmanu ἀρέσῃ : less probable, because more common. 


and is preferred by Stanley. Alford reads ἀρἔσει.] 
5 Ver. 34.—Many readings and punctuations. 
6 Ver. 85.-πἹυμῴορον. The Kec. συμφέρον. 


The right text is τὸν κοσμόν (without τουτον, which originated in what 


[Yet it is found in A. B. Ὁ. E. F.G., 


See Exeget and Crit. 
The former is supported by the older authorities ΓΑ. B. D1] 


7 Ver. 35.—Evrdpedpov is better supported than the Rec. εὐπρόσεδρον, being found in [A. B.D. E. F. G.]. 

8 Ver. 37.—Avrou is strongly supported, and is indeed original. 

® Ver 37.—The τοῦ before τηρεῖν is indeed omitted by good authorities, but is nevertheless strongly supported [A. B. 
D.E. F. G.], and besides is the more difficult reading (Meyer, de Wette, Alf., have it; Stanley rejects it]. 

10 Ver. 37, 88.—Lachmann reads ποιήσει with good, but not sufficiently adequate authorities. 


1 Ver. 38.—O ἐκγαμίζων. 


So Tisch., Meyer, Lachmann [Alford] and others [after A. B. Ὁ. E.]. The reading γαμίζων 


τὴν παρθένων ἑαυτοῦ, though indeed sustained by important authorities, is nevertheless perhaps a Gloss. 
12 Ver. 38.—Kai o. The Rec. ὁ dé. The former is the original [found in A. Β. D. E. F. 6.1], the latter was substituted 


by reason of the contrast implied. 


13 Ver. 39.—The Rec. has νόμῳ taken from Rom. viii. 2 [omitted in A. B. Ὁ. F.], and by Alford, Stanley, and other critics. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers, 25-28. But now concerning vir- 
gins.—In what follows Paul speaks indeed of 
unmarried men also, but it by no means follows 
from this that the word παρϑένος, virgin, should 
be extended to both sexes.* This would not suit 
with New Testament usage, for in Rev. xiv. 4, 
it stands only as a predicate, and describes a 
state; [ Hodge, on the contrary. ].—Virgins, pro- 
perly so-called, are the ones to whom his counsel 
here applies. Yet a reference to other unmar- 
ried persons is also involved. Schott (in his 
studies upon the Epistles to the Corinthians, 
Luth. Zeit. 1861-4) supposes him to denote such 
single persons of both sexes as had chosen the 
celibate state to serve the Lord in, whether as 
Deacons or Deaconesses, or in the free exercise 
of their gifts; [similarly Bengel, Olsh. But 
Meyer, ef a/., limit the designation to the female 
sex.] The dé indicates an advance in the discus- 
sion, which now returns from its digression to 
its proper theme, and contemplates the same in 
a new aspect.—I have no commandment of 
the Lord; but I give my judgment.— 
*Exitayy, commandment, just as in ver. 10. ‘‘We 
see here how important it was, in the view of the 
Apostle, to distinguish the positive commands of 
the Lord, from all others. This care of his pre- 
supposes with great probability the existence at 
that time of not merely an oral, but also a writ- 
ten tradition of the discourses of our Lord. 
Here we have a sure fixed point against the 
theory of the mythical origin of the Gospels.” 
Neanpver. [‘‘This passage has furnished the 
two words γνώμη and exitayn, which the Vulgate 
translates ‘‘consilium” and. ‘‘preceptum,” ad- 
vice and command—the origin of the famous dis- 
tinction of later times, between ‘counsels of 
perfection’ and ‘precepts.’ In this passage the 
distinction lies only in the fact that one was a 
command of Christ, and the other hisown opinion, 
although pronounced with Apostolical autho- 
rity.” SranLey.|] Respecting γνώμη consult on 
chap. i. 10. Here it means, best judgment, advice, 
counsel, (as in ver. 6, συχγνώμη). But this advice 
he presents as something important and worthy 


of consideration, by adding—as one that hath 


* Bloomfield says, Crit. Dig.: “The most eminent modern 
commentators are agreed that it must refer to both sexes, 
and thus be equivalent to our single persons; a sense not 
only recognized by the ancient Lexicographers, but occur- 
ring also in the Classical writers. So Krause, Lampe, 
Schleusner.” 





obtained mercy of the Lord to be faith- 
ful.—In this he, on the one hand, brings to view 
his Apostolic authority, showing that he is worthy 
of reliance, and that what he advised was some- 
thing which ought to be accepted as agreeable to 
the mind of the Lord, even though it may not have 
been credibly handed downinany express precept 
of His, according to the saying of Christ, ‘* Who- 
soever heareth you heareth me.” But, on the 
other hand, he speaks as in 2 Cor. iv. 1, in all 
humility giving honor to the grace of Christ, who 
had lifted him out of the depths of misery into 
this Apostolic office, and had given him the Spi- 
rit of truth, and had so revealed to him his own 
mind, that the advice he gave should merit perfect 
confidence (comp. ver. 40).—-IIvoréc, asin 1 Tim. 
i. 12, 15, Rev. i. 5, not exactly in the sense of be- 
lieving (Olst., Meyer, de Wette), nor yet precisely 
as true (Billr. and Riickert), but, faithful [as a 
steward, and dispenser of: the hidden things of 
God. Winer, sec. iv. 2; and so Stanley. Bloom- 
field says: ‘“‘as one worthy of credit,” referring 
to 1 Thess. ii. 4. ‘* Faith makes a true casuist.” 
Bence. ].—In ver. 26 ff., he gives his advice, 
first, in reference to the unmarried in general, 
and comes to speak of virgins in particular, not 
until ver. 36. The judgment is then introduced 
with a modest νομίζω [‘*which seldom, if ever, 
denotes in Scripture an absolute authority or 
decree, but a matter of opinion or private judg- 
ment, Matth. v.17; x. 84: xx. 10: Luke ii. 44; 
1 Tim. vi. 5, efc.”’” Broomrietp].—I suppose, 
therefore, this to be good on account of 
the present distress, that it is good for a 
person so to be.—i. ¢., unmarried. [Perhaps 
better, οὕτως, so ὦ. 6., as he is, married or single. 
This better suits the context; and the other is 
too far-fetched]. From the infinitive construc- 
tion, he passes over into that, with div, to which 
he might have been prompted by the subject of 
the clause, τὸ οὕτως εἴναι, so that we need not 
assume, with Meyer and others, an anacoluthon 
here. [Yet it is very like one, and is so regarded 
by Alford and Stanley]. De Wette renders ὅτε, 
because, and τοῦτο, as referring to the being un- 
married; and makes the sense: ‘because it is, 
in general, good for men to be unmarried ;’ but 
here, he inserts the words: ‘in general,’ and his 
explanation by no means tallies with the clause: 
‘on account of the present distress :’—KdA/ov here 
designates that which is fitting, or advantageous, 
as may be seen in the ground alleged. [ Avdjé- 
m)—general term, including females, and might 
be rendered person]. By ‘the present distress,” 


160 


-- 





he means either some then urgent necessity,— 
according to some, the famine under Claudius, 
according to others, marital cares and suffer- 
ings (?), and, according to others, the oppressions 
and persecutions of Christians, according to 
Mecehler, the eradication of the sexual impulse 
in marriage; or it were better to understand by 
it some impending catastrophe just on the point 
of occurring,—it may be the fearful crisis and 
bitter conflicts just preceding the coming of 
Christ (dolores Messi) which was anticipated as 
near. [So Alford and Stanley (comp. Matth. 
xxiv. 8, 19, 21). At all events, the reference 
must be to something extraordinary. This is 
implied in the epithet ‘present.’ And it is no- 
thing more than “ἃ Popish perversion,” as 
Bloomfield says, ‘‘to change this from a special 
to a general admonition”’]. This ground avails 
naturally also for the explanatory clause,—Hast 
thou been bound toa wife? do not seek 
a separation. Hast thou been loosed 
from a wife? seek not a wife.—In the lat- 
ter clause, his advice to single persons already 
introduced by ἀνϑρώπω, in a general way, is 
more plainly brought out. This appears in the 
form of a contrast, as repeating the injunction 
of ver. 11, evidently for the sake of avoiding a 
misconstruction by opposers, of what had been 
previously said. [So Meyer and de Wette; but 
Alford more plausibly questions this, and takes 
the conjunction to be simply explanatory of his 
‘soto be’]. Here also, as in vy. 18, 21, various 
grammatical constructions are possible. It is 
best to regard the introductory clauses as either 
hypothetical or declarative: ‘If thou art bound, 
then,” efc.; or: ‘Thou art bound, seek not,” 
etc., the sense is the same. The γυναικί 
stands as in Rom. vii. 2, ἀνδρί: Dative of com- 
munion.—AéAvoai, ‘hast thou been loosed?’ im- 
plies primarily the dissolution of a connection 
before existing, whether by death, or otherwise. 
[If this be insisted on, the subsequent injunc- 
tion of the Apostle must then be interpreted of 
a second marriage]. But in this connection the 
simple fact of being free or unmarried, in general 
is meant; and the expression is introduced 
simply for the sake of harmonizing with dé ὃ e- 
oat, hast thou been bound? [so Alford; and Ben- 
gel, who says ‘‘that the latent participle here 
has the force of a noun.” ‘It is also remarked 
by Grotius and others, that passives in Heb. and 
Gr. are often used as neuters’]. That the in- 
junction: ‘‘do not seek a wife,’’ is to be taken 
merely as advice, is plain from what follows.— 
but even if thou shouldest have married, 
thou hast not sinned.—Not so, however, 
would it be in the other case. There would be 
sin in a married person seeking to be loosed. 
Hence it was only the last clause that was ad- 
vice. [‘From these words it has been rightly 
inferred that there were among the Corinthians 
persons, like those spoken of (1 Tim. iv. 3) for- 
bidding marriage, as if it were sinful.’ BLoom- 
FIELD]. Ταμήσῃς lit.: ‘If thou shouldest have mar- 
ried.’ In like manner γήμῃ. The word yapeir 
can be predicated also of the woman, if no 
accusative is appended. Otherwise the phrase 
is γαμεῖσϑαί τινι, to be married to some one.— 
After quieting all doubts of conscience in the 
matter, he points to another consideration which 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


------------------------.---- - -- [ὃ -“΄ἷς-Ὃο[ὃἐἔἴὺϊἷἧϊἵἷ΄ἷ!Ὃ ΄ οὦὃἃἝἷἾἕ 


was closely connected with the present dis- 
tress.—Tribulation in the flesh, however, 
will such people have.—If with Calvin 
and others we here conceive an allusion to 
domestic troubles, these must be understood 
as intensified by the ‘distress,’ since the re- 
lations entered into by the married people 
(their cares for husband, wife and children, and 
bodily needs) involve peculiar perplexity in 
times of persecution and of other troubles (comp. 
Luke xxiii. 28; Matth. xxiv. 19). The words: 
‘in the flesh,’ are to be connected either with 
‘tribulation,’ or with ‘shall have;’ the sense is 
the same. Σάρξ, flesh, denotes the lower sensu- 
ous life, with all its interests; here it refers to 
the domestic life, with its manifold solicitudes 
about food, and clothing, and the preservation 
of things appertaining to it from all injury, ete. 
Οἱ τοιοῦτοι, such people, ὃ, e., such as marry—But 
I spare you.—Paul here expresses his pater- 
nal benevolence; φ. d., ‘in giving you such ad- 
vice, I would fain obviate all your troubles.’ 
Φέιδομαι stands here for geccoiuyv. ἄν, 1 desire to 
spare you. Paul is not here ascribing to the un- 
married any greater moral excellence than to 
the married, as Romanists imagine; but is only 
contrasting the comparative outward ease of the 
one, with the burdens which will press on the 
other by reason of approaching troubles. [An- 
other interpretation given by Augustine and the 
Latin Fathers, and preferred by Estius, Newe- 
macher, and Bloomfield, is: ‘I spare you the pain 
of dilating on those evils’—parallel to 2 Cor. xii. 
6]. This seems to be confirmed by the following, 
τοῦτο δὲ φημι: ‘but this I do say’]. 

Vers. 29-31. He now proceeds to confirm the 
advice above given, and to render his readers 
more inclined to follow it.—But this I say, 
brethren.—Toiro, this, might refer to what pre- 
cedes, provided only the ὅτε, because, were genu- 
ine. But now it can serve only to introduce 
what follows, and that, too, in such a way as to 
exhibit the importance of this opening—the 
time henceforth is shortened, in order 
that.—Here the punctuation and reading are 
contested. The reading best accredited is ἐστὶν τὸ 
λοιπόν. In this case, as in the reading τὸ λοιπόν 
ἐστὶν, TO λοιπόν may be connected with what pre- 
cedes, as well as with what follows. On the 
contrary, were ἐστίν repeated, it could only be 
joined with the latter; hence, we might suppose 
that this reading originated in the idea that 
τὸ λοιπόν must be connected with what fol- 
lows. Then it would mean: ‘it remains that,’ 
etc. [as in the E. version]. This would be op- 
posed neither by the article, nor by the iva. For 
even in Plato the article is found in such a mode 
of speaking: τὸ dé λοιπὸν ἤδη ἡμῖν ἐστι σκέψαυϑαι 
(Passow II. 1, 81). But the iva shows that he 
is treating; here about the solution of a moral 
problem: ‘what remains is, that they may be,’ 
etc. But if we connect it with the foregoing, 
then it must be taken as a more exact qualifica- 
tion of the clause, g. d., ‘henceforth, for the fu- 
ture.’ The decision in regard to this case de- 
pends upon which connection yields better sense. 
[Most commentators decide for the latter view. 
Among these Meyer, Alford, Bloomfield, Hodge. 
It certainly yields the best sense.] But what 
are we to understand by the declaration: ὁ καιρὸς 


CHAP. VII. 25-40. 





συνεσταλμένος ἐστίν. Some [Rosen., Riickert, 
Olshausen] explain it: ‘the time is full of 
straits—grievous.’ But in those passages from 
which this signification is attempted to be proved 
(Mace. iii. 6; x. 3), the word is used only of 
persons, and then means humbled, cast down, 
which terms cannot be predicated of time. There 
remains, therefore, only the other interpreta- 
tion, contracted, limited, shortened. [“’ Συστέλλε- 
oa and συστόλῃ are the regular grammatical 
words used for the shortening of a syllable in pro- 
sody’’]. In any case, however, ὁ καιρὸς is not to 
be taken for the earthly life-time of individuals, 
[as Calvin and Estius]._ The context rather 
points to the period of time from thence onward, 
until the second advent. But does it here de- 
note the simple period of time in itself, or does 
it mean favorable time (opportunity)? ἡ. e., the 
time in which one can yet ensure his salvation, 
or prepare himself for that great change concur- 
rent with Christ’s second coming, which is to 
wind up the entire present condition of the 
world—the καιρὸς δεκτός: “the time accepted,” 
(2 Cor. vi. 2; comp. also Gal. vi. 10). In this 
case the predicate would suit still better, and 
also the adjunct τὸ λοιπόν: and we should ren- 
der: ‘the time (the opportune ptriod) is com- 
pressed, or shortened henceforth.’ The final 
clause—in order that those having wives, 
etc.—may be either referred to : ‘this [ say,’ as 
if by declaring the time short, he arrived at the 
thing here stated; or, which is better, it may be 
taken as assigning the reason why the time is 
shortened, so that it indicated the Divine pur- 
pose in this curtailment. [So Hodge, Alford]. 
And this is confirmed by the subsequent degla- 
ration brought in as proof: ‘for the fashion of 
this world passeth away,’ ver. 81. In this way a 
good meaning is obtained. But the other mode 
of punctuating yields also good sense: ‘it re- 
mains,’ ὦ. e., no other choice is left, but that those 
having wives, etc. This, however, is somewhat 
harsh, and the other merits the preference. But, 
perhaps, a still better one is afforded by the con- 
nection of τὸ λοιπόν with what follows, main- 
tained by Meyer (8 ed.) in the sense of: hence- 
forth, implying that ‘‘henceforth the relations 
should be regarded differently, from what they 
had been hitherto.” Ἵνα is postscribed as in 
Gal. ii. 10, and elsewhere.—may be as those 
not having them, and those weeping as 
though they wept not, and those rejoic- 
ing as though they rejoiced not, and 
those buying as those that possessed not, 
and those using the world as not using 
it.—These clauses denote an internal loosing of 
the spirit from all bonds (even the closest), and 
from all circumstances, and from the possession 
and use of all earthly goods; in short, they en- 
force the maintenance of a personal indepen- 
dence of all external worldly relations (Meyer), 
the refusal to be fettered by these things in our 
communion with God and Christ, so that the sac- 
rifice of all of them could be readily made when 
called for (comp. Luke xiv. 20). Accordingly, 
we are taught that no conjugal love, no sorrows 
over disasters and losses, no exultation over 
good fortune, should be allowed to possess the 
spirit, so as to impair that divine communion. 
And as Christians must ever be inwardly free 


͵ 





161 





from what is transient, in order to maintain that 
eternal blessing, so it becomes them to hold 
lightly by the earthly inheritance. They must 
ever remember that it is no abiding possession, 
and are not to cleave to it fondly; and finally, in 
reference to the use of the world, they should 
use ‘‘as using not.” The word ‘buying’ com- 
ported well with the circumstances of the Co- 
rinthians. Corinth being a great emporium, the 
people were given to traffic, especially to buying. 
In regard to καταχρώμενοι, expositors are 
divided; some take it as equivalent to χρώμενοι, 
κατά being only intensive; others translate it, 
abuse; but the latter meaning does not sustain 
the analogy with the foregoing clauses. [Alford 
renders it: ‘*‘using it in full,’ implying an ex- 
treme and greedy use, which turns a legitimate 
use intoa fault” ]. The κατά was, perhaps, sug- 
gested by that in κατέχοντες just preceding. 
Xp7oda, to use, takes its object here in the accu- 
sative [the only instance of the kind in the New 
Testament], (comp. Passow No. II. 2, p. 2496). 
The Rec. τῶ κοσμῷ is a change made in accord- 
ance with the more common construction. By 
‘the world,’ we are to understand the totality of 
the visible creation, of all objects, goods, rela- 
tions, belonging to the present age. It com- 
prises in one, all the objects expressed or im- 
plied in the previous,clauses. Hence, the fol- 
lowing sentence, also, extends to these, — for 
the fashion of this world passeth away.— 
(παράγει--τὸ σχῆμα.)--- this we are not to 
understand a mere change of scene (an image 
drawn from the theatre)—a daily shifting of 
events belonging to the present; nor yet the 
transientness of earthly things in general; but 
the mighty revolution attendant upon the advent 
of Christ—the entire vanishing or destruction of 
the form of this world, its outward appearance 
and mode of existence, of which mention is made 
in 1 Jno. ii. 17; Rev. xxi. 1. This great change 
presents itself to him as one close at hand, and, 
therefore, he speaks of it in the present. (Mey- 
er: ‘is on the point of passing away’). ‘*The 
disposition which Paul here inculcates in view 
of the expected palingenesis of the world, is one 
demanded at all times. All earthly things are 
vanishing and in perpetual flux; we are ever 
approaching a new order of things. The woes 
which Paul saw, have often repeated themselves, 
and will often be repeated, until the final catas- 
trophe breaks in.” NranpEr. Since this sen- 
tence does not assign the reason for an exhorta- 
tion, but is brought in to substantiate that which 
has been previously set forth as a Divine pur- 
pose, we cannot directly annex to it the following 
verse, putting a comma after τούτου. But we 
are to regard this (ver. 82) as a new thought 
introduced—a still further reason assigned for 
recommending the single state. It is, however, 
directly joined to what precedes, in so far as 
Paul’s will and wishes aim at having them free 
from the care which belongs to the things of 
this world, which is so fast hastening to its end. 

Vers. 32-34. But I would that you were 
without care.—By ἀμέριμνοι, he means, free- 
dom from care about the things of this world, as 
set forth in the 33d verse; for the care which 
he first, speaks of,—he that is unmarried 
careth for the things of the Lord—can only 


162 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—— NN A EE DT 


be something which must command approval. It 
is perfectly right for a person (with undivided 
heart) to be solicitous for that which belongs to 
his Lord. And in what way, he explains further 
by the expression,—how he may please the 
Lord.—To the unmarried, 7. e., to him who has 
the gift of continence, and who remains single, 
in order to devote himself to the interests of 
God’s kingdom, untrammelled by earthly bonds 
(comp. Matt. xix. 12), it belongs to occupy him- 
self in the concerns of his Lord, and that with 
the simple desire of pleasing Him.—While the 
Apostle here has in his mind, those who, like him- 
self, were in the true sense ἄγαμοι, unmarried, in 
what follows, on the other hand, he exhibits to 
view the ordinary experience of mankind, [and 
explains the nature of the care from which he 
would have them relieved].—But he that is 
married careth for the things of this world, 
etc.—Here he shows that on entering the married 
life, they have at once a divided heart, become 
entangled in the occupations of the earthly life, 
and exhibit a tendency to consider how one 
party may please the other, how the one (even 
in these worldly interests), may do right by the 
other, ete.—Yet in this Paul does not intend to 
set forth the evils which are necessarily involved 
in the very nature of marriage, but only to state 
what is usually found toybe the case in actual 
experience. He does not mean to disparage the 
divine ordinance, as though it was necessarily 
calculated to promote estrangement from God, 
(Burger.)—In carrying out of this thought in re- 
ference to the wife (ver. 34) Paul continues:— 
Divided also is the woman and the vir- 
gin.—Mepépcorac kai ἡ χυνὴ καὶ ἡ παρ- 
% évoc.—We encounter, first, a great diversity 
of readings and punctuation. The first consists 
in the following variations:—1. On good autho- 
rities Lachmann reads καὶ μεμέρισται kai,—and 
after this, although on fewer authorities, ἡ γυνὴ 
ἡ ἄγαμος. ἃ. Tischendorf, with Griesbach and 
Scholz: peu. καὶ ἡ γυνὴ kai—supported by autho- 
rities, in part equally weighty, and in part more 
preponderant. 38. The received text drops the 
καί after μεμ., but without sufficient authority.— 
The punctuation, apart from the various unte- 
nable experiments of Griesb. and Scholz, may be 
twofold. Lachmann and Riickert attach the «az 
peu. to what precedes, making ὁ γαμήσας the sub- 
ject of it; and read, ‘he that is married is di- 
vided, 7. ¢., distracted with cares.’ Kai ἡ yov7 
then begins a new sentence, translated thus: 
‘both the unmarried wife (— widow) and the 
unmarried virgin cares,’ efc. On the contrary, 
Tisch. and Meyer begin a new sentence with jeu. 
‘And there is a difference between the wife and 
the virgin; the unmarried careth,’ efe. [In his 
edition of the Codex Sinaiticus, Tisch. follows the 
punctuation of Lach. and Riickert, given above, 
putting a period after καὶ μεμ.. The difference, 
according to De Wette and Meyer, is to be ex- 
plained from the fact that vez. was not under- 
stood (and therefore entirely left out), or was 
misunderstood (as meaning: ‘distracted with 
cares,’) and therefore was attached by καί to the 
foregoing; consequently, γυνή was necessarily 
taken to denote, a widow (Esth. vidua), and as 
the result, ἡ ἄγαμος, the unmarried, was either 
put before (Vulgate), or inserted after (comp. 


i 1... . .. .. . ..... 


ΒΈΕΙΟΗΕ. Comm. Crit. Spec. 111, Gott. 1889). But 
μεμέρισται, is divided, indicates the diversity be- 
tween the woman and the virgin, in respect of 
care (μεριμνᾷν). They are divided, separated, 
in their interests. (Comp. μερίζεσϑαι, Matt. xii. 
25.) Theoph.: μεμερισμέναι εἰσὶ ταῖς σπουδαὶς. 
‘The man is divided between the Lord and his 
wife.”” Neanper. Luther’s translation: ‘there 
is a difference,’ is not sufficiently definite. The 
use of the singular is to be explained from the 
position of the verb, and because the whole fe- 


male sex is here embraced as one idea (Meyer.)— ἡ 


The unmarried cares for the things of the 
Lord, that she may be holy in both body 
and spirit.—For ‘virgin,’ he now says the ‘un- 
married ;’ and instead of ‘how she may please 
the Lord,’ he now puts, that which leads to this, 
‘that she may be holy,’ 1. ¢., entirely devoted to 
the Lord, to serve Him with her whole person, 
and all her powers. First, he specifies ‘in 


body,’ because the marriage state primarily obli- 


gates the body in an earthly or worldly rela- 
tion, and involves power of the man over the 
body of his wife (ver. 4), and easily occasions a 
defilement of the physical life. But the sanctity 
of the body, if it is of the right sort, is rooted 
in the sanctity of the spirit (comp. Osiander). 
The καὶ before σώματε has the predominance of 
authorities in its favor; a few support Lachmann 
in reading τῷ σῴματι καὶ τῷ πνεύματι. [** The 
word holy has the sense that it has in ver. 14, 
and so often elsewhere. It is not in purity and 


spirituality that the virgin is said to have advan-_ 


tage of the wife; but in freedom from distracting 
cares. In ver. 14, even the unbelieving hus- 
band or wife is said to be sanctified, or made 
holy. And it is in the same general sense of con- 
secration, that holiness is here predicated of vir- 
gins, as distinguished from wives. It would be 
to impugn a divine ordinance, and to contradict 
all experience, to say that married women, be- 
cause married, are less holy than the unmarried. 
Paul advances no such idea.” Hopgx. |—But 
she that is married careth for the things 
of the world, how she may please her 
husband.—[This is mot charged upon her as 
sin, but it isa part of her obligation of marriage, 
and is therefore expected of her. And if she 
has ‘married in the Lord,’ then even this very 


effort to please her husband may be a part of the’ 


service she renders unto the Loyd. Yet while 
this is so, the obligation to the husband, it must 
be confessed, not unfrequently presents a tempta- 
tion to a divided service, and in her endeavors 
to gratify his wishes, especially if he is of a 
worldly, or even partially sanctified spirit, is 
often betrayed into acts which militate against 
her piety, and interfere with her higher obliga- 
tions. This is how it happens that many ἃ 
Christian woman comes to be found absenting 
herself from the place of prayer, frequenting the 
ball-room and theatre, giving parties on the 
Sabbath, and in other ways compromising her 
conscience to her own spiritual injury and the 
discredit of her profession. And it is to the 
danger of such evils, incurred by marriage, that 
the Apostle points. 7 

Ver. 85. And this I speak for your own 
profit.—Here he obyiates misapprehension, and 
assures them that his commendation of the sin« 


. 


CHAP. VII. 25-40. 


—— 55... ΠπΠπΠπΠπΠΠπΠῆτ -ττ͵τ ,ᾺὈΓΠΓΠ΄.Ἐ-Ἐς 


gle state, did not flow from any selfish motives— 
out of a desire to rule their conscience, or to 
obtain honor by enforcing upon them his own 
celibate condition; but only out of regard to 
their own advantage, whether it be to spare 
them trouble (ver. 28), or, as the following con- 
text would indicate, to render the maintenance 
of their Christian profession at that particular 
crisis a little easier. This is the profit which he 
now develops antithetically :—not that I may 
cast a snare over you—(pdyov ἐπι βάλω) [a 
figure borrowed from hunting, and means lit., 
to fling a noose]. Here he applies it to mean the 
ensnaring of their conscience, and binding them 
to his opinion. In like manner we have the ex- 
pressions ‘to put a yoke,” ‘to lay a burden,” 
in Acts xv. 10; Matth. xxiii. 4. Less plausible 
is the explanation: ‘to awaken scruples of con- 
science,’ or, ‘to endanger your purity by with- 
holding you from marriage.’ And just as little 
may we connect either of these interpretations 
with the first. The ‘profit’ above spoken of is 
more fully explained by the phrase—but with 
a view to seemliness,—daiAAd πρὸς To 
εὔσχημον. IIpoc here denotes the final end, 
as in chap. x. 11, ete.,=‘for the furtherance of 
what is comely; that is, honestum, the worthier, 
more independent position—the one free from 
worldly cares (comp. Rom. xiii. 18; 1 Thess. iv. 
12).—As a further definition of this, he pro- 
ceeds,—and that ye may attend upon the 
Lord without distraction.—By this he 
means a perpetual engagedness with him, with- 
out being diverted hither and thither by another’s 
influence. This is ‘the caring for the things 
of the Lord,’ mentioned above, a life entirely 
devoted to the Lord and His cause—the oppo- 
site of being ‘‘troubled about many things” 
(Luke x. 41)—the practice of holiness (ver. 34). 
The whole is—cioynuoveity καὶ εὐπάρεδρον εἶναι 
(Meyer, Ed. 38. The exhibition of the inner life 
in its entire outward manifestation in a mode 
corresponding to this devotion to the Lord; the 
whole moral consecration and self-discipline, so 
far as it expresses itself in demeanor, in speech, 
posture, behavior, as the true outward type of 
the Christian life). [‘*The image here conveyed 
is exactly expressed by the story in Luke, of 
Mary ‘‘sitting by the side of Jesus’ feet” (παρα - 
καϑίσασα, comp. εὐπάρεδρον), and Mar- 
tha, ‘“‘ who was cumbered (ΠΠεριεσπᾶτο) with much 
serving,” and “careful (μεριμνᾷς) about many 
things.” SranLey]. 

Ver. 36. But if any man think that he 
behaveth himself unseemly towards his 
virgin,—He now comes to speak particularly 
of virgins [and addresses himself especially to 
fathers, since, according to the custom of Jews 
and Greeks, and most oriental nations at this 
day, the disposal of daughters in marriage rested 
with them]. The dé introduces in contrast with 
the ‘seemliness’ above spoken of, an unseemli- 
ness (ἀσχημονεῖν). This word means to act un- 
suitably, unbecomingly (xiii. 5). It may also mean 
[see Wetstein], ‘to suffer something unbecoming, 
to be disgraced.’ [And so most of the Gr. fathers, 
and Grotius interpret the word here. ‘The 
disgrace, which, according to the opinions of the 
East, female celibacy involved, extended from 








163 





the virgin to the father (comp. Ecclesiasticus xlii. 
9).’ Hence their desire to marry their daughters 
as speedily as possible (Bloomfield)]. But only 
the former meaning suits with ἐπὶ, which indi- 
cates the direction of an action [so Hodge, Ro- 
binson], towards, or in respect to [JELY’s Gr. 
Gram., ἢ 635, 3, 6, comp. 3 905, 3, 6]. If it had 
the latter signification, we would rather expect 
ἀσχημονήσειν, that he will suffer disgrace, etc. Both 
significations, however, lead to the same thing; 
for he does not here allude to the disgrace of 
living unmarried, and so becoming an old maid, 
which would be brought upon the virgin, but to 
the disgrace of the temptation which would be 
occasioned by refusing her marriage; [so Alford, 
Hodge]. ‘His virgin’—his daughter,—if she 
be of full age.—Ilapévoc ὑπέρακμος Means one 
who has passed the years of her youth (accord- 
ing to Plato, the ἀκμῇ of a woman was at twenty 
years of age), an age when, by the refusal of 
marriage on the part of the father, a surrender 
to her lover on her part was more to be feared 
than’in earlier years.—and it must needs 
so be,—kalt οὕτως ὀφείλει γίνεσθϑαι. 
These words cannot be made dependent (Riick- 
ert) on the ἐάν preceding, on account of the in- 
dicative; neither can γένεσϑαι ever be=vévery, 
g. d., ‘so she should remain single.’ They de- 
pend rather on εἰ [understood]; and by οὕτως 
yév. he means that which is expressed in the fol- 
lowing clause, viz., the marriage of the daughter. 
The ὀφείλει (—oportet, Passow IT. 2, p. 1029) im- 
plies that the temperament of the daughter, [or 
some other equally cogent circumstance for the 
phrase, may include those of every kind, whether 
existing in the father or in the daughter] makes - 
marriage necessary. It introduces a further 
objective element, in addition to the subjective 
one, expressed in vouifer.—let him do what he 
wishes—'O éAe denotes not mere caprice, the 
arbitrary wish of the father, but a purpose 
grounded upon his best judgment (νομίζει) [and 
here it will be seen that the whole authority in 
the premises rested with the father].—let them 
marry.—The subject of γαμείτωσαν is easily un- 
derstood, vzz., the virgin andher lover. ‘It can 
also be the plurality implied in the single subject 
‘virgin,’ παρϑένος, g.d., ‘let the virgins marry.’” 
NeanveR. [Freedom of opinion and action is 
wisely allowed in matters morally indifferent. 
As to what is the specific duty each person must 
decide for himself]. 

Ver. 387. But he who—Here he introduces 
a case directly the opposite, and with unmis- 
takable approval, as is shown by the last clause. 
In contrast with the previous one, who has the 
negative virtue of sinning not, this one ‘doeth 
well.’ The same may be inferred from the im- 
peratives, which are to be construed as permis- 
sive. First, he brings prominently to view the 
steadfastness and independence of conviction and 
resolve shown,—hath stood steadfast in his 
heart,—in contrast with the weakness and de- 
pendence of the other, in ver. 86 (ἑδραῖος, fast 
grounded, found also in xv. 58 and in Col. i. 24). 
[‘* This allusion here is to a statue standing firm 
on its pedestal.” BuoomrieLp]. The points in _ 
which this firmness is shown are more fully de- 
fined in the two following clauses, which are te 


104 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





be considered as the positive and negative ex- 
planation of the first.—having no necessity, 
—in contrast with the necessity occasioned by 
the temperament of the daughter, [or any other 
constraining circumstances ] (ver. 26)—but has 
power.—There is an anacoluthon here ἔχει (in- 
stead of éywv)—over his own will—ui. e., to 
do as he chooses. [‘‘Often the willis one thing, 
and the power is another.”. BenerL]. And what 
this will is he next states,—and has resolved 
this in his heart.—By ‘this’ (rovro) he means, 
but doesn’t say: ‘to keep her unmarried.’—in 
order to preserve his virgin.—rov τηρεῖν 
τὴν ἑαυτοῦ παρϑένον. If itread, τηρεῖν, or, 
τὸ τηρεῖν, then we would simply have here the 
explanation of what goes before; but since the 
correct reading, τοῦ τηρεῖν is to be regarded as a 
final clause, this, according to all well established 
usage, cannot be. We are therefore to take 
τηρεῖν τὴν παρϑένον not as a periphrasis for: ‘to 
keep her unmarried ;’ but it means: ‘to preserve 
her in her virgin state, sothat she may be holy both 
in body and in spirit.’ [Hence we might render 
it: ‘in order to keep her as avirgin’]. Not, 
however, for the sake of his own paternal inte- 
rests, as Meyer assumes. This by no means 
follows from the ἑαυτοῦ, and it must be regarded 
as a selfish motive, altogether inconsistent with 
the spirit of the Apostle’s exposition. The whole 
matter rests upon the paternal authority ac- 
knowledged not simply among Jews and Greeks, 
but also in the sphere of Christian life. And to 
this also the words τὴν παρϑένον εαυτοῦ. 
refer. But the very manner in which the Apos- 
tle treats the affair, indicates that it is not a 
despotic, reckless rule, but the exercise of an 
authority which is considerate of the nature, the 
circumstances and the well being of the daughter, 
so that the resolve expressed in κέκρικεν is to be 
regarded as a well considered one. The exclu- 
sive action of the father in this case, however, 
indicates a distinction between the customs of 
antiquity and those of our modern times (comp. 
Grot. in hoc loco,.)—doeth well.—[ An approval 
which went right in the face of Jewish and Gen- 
tile opinions and prejudices—a commendation of 
a course of conduct, which in view of the ex- 
igencies of the times, and probabilities of good 
it involved, might seem desirable; but yet might 
not be adopted, because of the prevailing views 
of marriage; and which therefore required the 
special sanction of the Apostle to strengthen per- 
sons in the adoption of it. 

Ver. 38. So then both he that giveth her 
in marriage doeth well, and he that giveth 
her notin marriage doeth better.—Here he 
reaches the result of his discussion. The xai— 
καί, both—and, suit properly only to a repetition 
of the words, ‘doeth well,’ (hence the var. dé, in 
which case the first καί might be translated, also). 
It appears as if Paul intended originally to re- 
peat the words, ‘doeth well;’ but then found it 
more suitable to the relation previously ex- 
pressed (‘he sinneth not’—‘he doeth well’), to 
put the second clause in the comparative. The 
former is well done, as being in accordance with 
the circumstances, and avoiding disgrace; [in- 
deed, the man would have done wrong, had he 
acted otherwise]; the latter is better, according 











worth, as the Romanists pretend, but in point of 
advantage, considering the times, and the duties 
to be performed. 7 

Vers. 39, 40. The wife is bound by the 
law so long as her husband liveth.—That 
which he has said in reference to the marriage 
of virgins, he now applies to the remarrying of 
widows. [‘*There seems to be no doubt enter- 
tained respecting the second marriage of the 
man, probably because in the case of widowers 
a new marriage was generally of pressing im- 
portance, on account of the motherless children; 
therefore the question here is only touching the 
woman. The limitation, ‘only in the Lord,’ 
moreover, must be regarded as referring also to 
the man (2 Cor. vi. 14, 15.) OtsHAusEN]. After 
that he has expressed the woman’s release from 
obligation to her husband in case of his death, 
and her liberty to marry again according to her 
pleasure, on the sole condition that it be a Chris- 
tian union, he points to the higher satisfaction 
of remaining in widowhood. But he sets this 
forth as his own view; which, however, is to be 
regarded as the view of one who has the spirit 
of the Lord. The word δέδεται, is bound, as in 
ver. 29, Rom. vii. 2, excludes the idea of divorce 
and marriage with another.—but if her hus- 
band ‘sleep,’ ἡ 6.,ὄ is dead. Rom. vii. 8. The 
καί before κοιμηϑῇ, which Tischendorf has ac- 
cepted, is not sufficiently well attested. In that 
case it would necessarily be translated: ‘but in 
case the man should even die.’—only in the 
Lord.—These words do not simply mean: ‘ina 
Christian spirit,’ but they teach that the mar- 
riage should be in fellowship with the Lord,— 
hence a marriage with a Christian (ver. 12 ff. re- 
fer to marriage before conversion). This only 
gives to this limitation its proper significance; 
μονον, as in Gal. ii. 10.— But she is more 
blessed.—He presupposes the possibility of an 
undisturbed devotion to the Lord and His cause, 
such as shall insure to a Christian woman higher 
contentment (comp. ver. 34); not simply freedom 
from tribulation, nor yet higher blessedness in 
heaven.—if she so remain, 7. e., unmarried 
(comp. ver. 26); ‘‘it being supposed that she can 
preserve herself pure.” BLoomrreLp.—accord- 
ing to my judgment.—[Is this a modest way’ 
of uttering what should be deemed by us autho- 
ritative, as coming from one who was inspired 
by the Spirit; or is it simply the expression of 
an opinion, which, though coming from an in- 
spired Apostle, was not intended to bind the 
conscience? In short, is this advice which we 
are at liberty to set aside, or is it obligatory pre- 
cept? This question, one would suppose, ought 
to be decided by the consideration of the source 
whence it comes. If it proceeds from a person 
who, however sound in judgment, is still fallible, 
and has no authority over us, then there would 
be in us the liberty to differ. But if it comes 
from the all-wise God, advice at once partakes of 
the character of a command; for not to follow the 
best light, not to do the best thing, is certainly 
sin. Who, then, is the author of the advice— 
Paul, as a counsellor or friend? or Paul, as an 
inspired Apostle? This depends on how we inter- 
pret the next clause. ]—I think also, e/c.—There 
is here a polemic side-glance cast at his oppo- 


to what is said in ver. 84,—[better, not in moral | nents, who disparaged him, and refused to recog- 





CHAP. VII. 25-40. 


165 





nize him as an Apostle endowed with the Spirit 
of God equally with the others. Δοκῶ, an ironical 
Litotes. ‘*The κῴγω, and J, presents an antago- 
nism against those who ascribed to themselves 
alone the possession of the Spirit; we detect in 
these words a side-glance at the Judaizers who 
refused to acknowledge thé authority of the Apos- 
tle, and especially contemned the single life so 
much esteemed by him.” Neranper.—[If this 
construction be correct, then the expression: 
‘TI think I have,” is not to be taken as implying 
any distrust on the Apostle’s part as to his actual 
possession of the Spirit. On the contrary, there 
is here, as most commentators concede, ‘‘an em- 
phatic medosis expressive of full persuasion and 
certainty.”” The inference then is, that the 
“judgment” issuing from this high source, is en- 
titled not only to deference, but to obedience. 
When it is God that advises, who will venture, 
or has the liberty to say, Nay?] 

[Ozss.:—*The arguments by which the Apos- 
tle here recommended celibacy to the Corinthians, 
have been urged by the Papists in support of the 
rulers of their Church, who oblige the clergy and 
the monastic orders to live unmarried. And it 
must be acknowledged, that at first sight, these 
arguments seem to be properly applied by them. 
Nevertheless, when it is considered, that the 
Apostle’s advices were suited to Christians in the 
then persecuted stage of the Church, and were ad- 
dressed only to such as could live chastely un- 
married, it may fairly be presumed, that the 
Papists have stretched his advices farther than 
the Apostle intended, when they represent them 
as binding in all ages and countries, on those 
who wish to live piously.””» Macxnicur. ] 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Duties of parents towards their children in the 
matter of marriage. Among the most delicate 
problems of human life, calling for the exercise 
of firmness no less than of consideration, of wis- 
dom no less than love, is the right conduct of pa- 
rents in reference to the marriage of their chil- 
dren—especially of daughters. To insist upon 
their settlement unconditionally, is, without 
doubt, unworthy of a Christian, and must be 
looked upon as the token of a worldly, unbe- 
lieving, or, at least, little-believing temper. At 
all events, regard should be had to this, that a 
Christian should marry one like-minded. Here, 
that which is inculcated upon widows in vy. 40, 
holds good absolutely—‘ only in the Lord.’ Ma- 
trimonial connections between believers and chil- 
dren of this world, entered into out of mere car- 
nal complacency, or with an eye to property and 
brilliant position in society, and in the hope that 
some saving influence may at the same time be 
exerted, are, to say the least, exceedingly ha- 
zardous; and they more commonly result in a 
way directly the opposite of the one counted on— 
the secularization of the believing party (comp. 
Gen. vi.). All such connections Christian pa- 
rents should aim to hinder, rather than help; 
yea, they should endeavor, by all the means in 
their power, to restrain and hold back their chil- 
dren from them, even though it be at the cost of 
much pain and bitter struggle. Cases may in- 
deed occur, when yielding will be unavoidable; 








but, at all events, consent should not be granted 
without giving earnest warning of the sad mis- 
take committed, and of the great responsibility 
and danger incurred.—Again, if it be seen that 
a daughter has little or no inclination to marry, 
and that she is endowed with special gifts for the 
service of the Lord in her virgin state, and that 
she takes delight in such service, then does it 
become the parent to stand fast against all soli- 
citation on the part of suitors and relatives, and 
to sustain their child in her endeavors to devote 
herself to the Divine calling. But the delibera- 
tion in the case must be a comprehensive one, 
weighing well all circumstances, and attended 
with earnest prayer for that Divine wisdom, 
which will enable the parents to examine the in- 
ward and outward condition of their daughter, 
and to distinguish clearly between caprice and 
prudery and carnal desire to consult her own 
convenience on the one hand, and a true spiritual 
firmness and proper regard for the service of the 
Lord on the other; and also for that simplicity 
of heart which shall exclude all selfish interests, 
and leave no room for after regrets to come up 
and harass when it is too late. 

2. [Marriage being a Divine institution, and 
designed to subserve the highest moral and spi- 
ritual interests of mankind, and’being then most 
truly blessed when occurring ‘‘in the Lord,” it 
is eminently fitting that the solemnization should 
be a religious act, performed by a minister, and 
under the sanction of the Church. ‘The cus- 
tom of thus making it an ecclesiastical ceremo- 
nial,” says Besser, ‘‘is as certainly in harmony 
with its character as a union in the Lord, as the 
popular cry for civil marriage accords with the 
declaration: ‘ We will not have this man to reign 
over us.’ ”’ 

3. [‘* The practice of the highest duties of Chris- 
tianity is compatible with every station and condition 
of life that is not in itself unlawful. If even the 
degraded state of slavery be consistent with the 
cultivation of the true spirit of Christian liberty, 
if even the great religious divisions of Jew and 
Gentile may be regarded as alike compatible 
with the service of God, then in all other states 
in life equally the spirit of the Apostolic injunc- 
tions may be observed where, in the letter, they 
seem most disregarded. Freedom from worldly 
cares may be maintained in the married as well 
as in the single state; indifference to worldly 
gain may exist in riches, no less than in poverty. 
Our nearness to God depends not on our deser- 
tion of one religious community for another, but 
on our keeping His commandments in whatever 
religious community His providence has placed 
us.” STANLEY]. 

4. [Right and wrong, though absolute in their 
essential principles, yet, as determinable in the 
forms of human conduct, can seldom be defined and 
enforced by specific rules. Much here depends on 
the peculiarities of personal condition and cir- 
cumstance. What may be proper and beneficial 
for one, may prove equally unseemly and hurt- 
ful for anothey. Yea, the particular duty of a 
person in reference to the same thing, is often 
modified or even reversed by changes of time 
and place. Hence, in relation to the details of 
conduct, the best course to be pursued, is simply 


to state the general principles which should 


166 





govern, to prescribe the ultimate ends to be 
sought, and then leave it for each one to ascer- 
tain and decide for himself upon the proper 
methods to be adopted by him in the discharge 
of his own specific obligations. To aid in dis- 
covering what the specific duty is, the advice of 
judicious friends and of Gospel ministers. may, 
and ought to be, both sought and given. But 
when, instead of advice, there are imposed the 
prescripts of unwarranted authority, then the 
inevitable result is injury and ruin to the very 
cause these were unwisely intended to further. 
Either the morality secured is that of a legal, 
slavish obedience that crushes out the joy of a 
true divine service, or the natures thus put under 
bondage rebelin secret, and thus fall into grosser 
sins, and incur the greater guilt. An instruc- 
tive illustration of these disastrous consequences 
is seen in the history of Romish monasticism. 
And similar mistakes are constantly made in the 
measures resorted to for the promotion of tem- 
perance, and the maintenance of the Sabbath, 
and the suppression of many sorts vf public 
amusements, and the regulation-of-other -depart- 
ments of morals. Too great reliance is placed 
on law, and too little upon moral religious in- 
struction and advice. Sound morality can only 
be established and furthered by the enlightenment 
of the conscience, and the instruction of the un- 
derstanding as to the best means by which be- 
hests of conscience can be fulfilled; and it can 
coexist only with a degree of liberty of judgment 
and action in things indifferent. What are the 
proper functions, bearings, and limitations cf law 
in this direction, is a question too broad to be 
discussed here]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


STarKE:—Ver. 25, In all matters and ques- 
tions which are not expressly decided by the 
written word, it is the part of a true and well- 
qualified teacher to understand how to counsel 
the conscierce according to those fundamental 
principles which are found in the Scriptures. 
Hence, he must be able to comprehend and ap- 
ply these principles in a divine light.—Ver. 26. 
Even now, in. consequence of the corrupt state 
of the Church, the domestic peace of Christians 
is often embittered by the influences of an evil 
world. Hence, we may infer that Paul would 
still give many the same advice which he gave 
of old, provided they were endowed with the 
gift of continence, and could preserve a virgin 
modesty by prayer and self-restraint (ver. 7 ff.) 
(Hed). The constraints arising from persecu- 
tion are one thing, and the constraints of a clois- 
ter entered into by an inconsiderate vow are 
another thing.—Ver. 27 (Spener). He who has 
received the gift of chastity, may abide by it or 
not, according as he may judge it serviceable to 
the greater honor of God and the better per- 
formance of that to which he has been called by 
God.—Ver. 28. Marriage is, in itself. a sacred 
ordinance, and no one must accuse himself of 
sin in having married, unless he did so from im- 
pure motives. Many a person neither learns 
nor surmises the burden of the married life; 
experience makes them rue it when too late. 
Let those who will be married, make up their 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— 


mind for allchances. But if the married partie 

are united in love and in fear of God, they wil 

be able to lighten each other’s burdens.—Ven 
29. Husbands should, indeed, love their wives 
with peculiar affection, but this affection should 
be tempered with self-denial, and not allowed to 
grow inordinate. Yea, they must hold them- 
selves prepared for, and resigned to, a sepa- 
ration when God calls.—Ver. 30. Creature en- 
joyments should be received as from God. Im 
this way, they may be assimilated to our spirit- 
ual enjoyments. The fear of God, and regard 
for His will, loosens our hold on the earthly, 
moderates our temporal pleasures, makes us sub- 
missive amid losses (Job i. 21), consoles us in 
trouble, comforts us in our tears, and causes us 
to cleave lightly to all our possessions.—Ver. 31. 
Believers here are as upon a journey; one is at 
liberty to use every thing at the inn; but fur- 
ther than this he’ takes no interest init, and he is 
content if he has some good to expect at the end 
of the journey. Augustine: Boni ad hoc utuntur 
mundo, ut fruantur Deo; mali contra, ut fruantur 
mundo, εἰ volunt Deo.*—Ver. 32 (Hed.). The 
statement here must be taken generally. Mar- 
riage is not absolutely, and without exception, 
a hinderance to Christianity, nor is a single life 
equally a help to it. Many a one finds more 
hinderance to good ina single than in married 
life; and marriage is, in itself, a God-service, 
for it is God’s holy ordinance, and the duties 
therein are commanded by Him, and, therefore, 
are a holy work, just as much as prayer. Let 
him who would please God acceptably in a sin- 
gle state, refrain from all self-complacency, and 
especially from the false notion that he is the 
more acceptable to God on: this account.—Spx- 
ner:—Marriage furnishes numerous occasions 
for other exercises of godliness, for the acknow- 
ledgment of the Divine goodness, ete. And God 
often blesses more effectually the few quarters 
of an hour devoted to Him amid its cares, than 
whole hours of monastic vigils. Ah! how many 
persons remain single only that they may serve 
the world better, and indulge more freely in 
personal luxuries! —Ver. 38. Things of this 
world, in themselves allowable (1 Tim. iii. 4, 5, 
8), such as nourishment, clothing, habitation, 
and the like, often so absorb the entire regard, 
as to keep a person from diligent attention to 
spiritual things. In this respect the unmarried 
have less of a hinderance, provided they have the 
gifts and calling requisite for celibacy. Between 
the two extremes of excessive severity towards 
the wife in imposing on her the whole burden of 
domestic cares, and of excessive indulgence in 
allowing her to rule, there runs the middle 
course, that of controlling one’s wife wisely, by 
a manifestation of affection and the exercise of 
patience.—Ver. 34. Sprner:—Even the love 
which the wife cherishes towards her husband, 
and the obedience she owes to him, often con- 
strain her, for the sake of avoiding displeasure, 
and creating disturbance, to interfere in some 
way, either by commission or omission, with the 
engagements in which she would otherwise seek 
to please the Lord.—Ver. 35. No preacher is 





* (Good men use the world that they may enjoy God; 
the bad, on the contrary, wish to use God that they may 
| enjoy the world]. 





CHAP. VII. 25--40. 


SLL... SSS - 


lord over the conscience; but he should be in- 
dulgent and not make a point of conscience 
where there is none to be made. In single life 
a person can often devote himself systematically 
to the study of God’s Word, for his own perso- 
nal edification, while in married life there is 
much to prevent this. A mother, for example, 
having a child either on her bosom or perpetu- 
ally around her, cannot concentrate her mind in 
devotion. Yet, what she does is none the less 
acceptable to God.—Ver. 36. Hepinger:—The 
authority of parents over their children is, in- 
deed, great; but woe to those who would con- 
strain them to an unwilling marriage, only for 
the sake of money or honor. And woe to those, 
also, who allow them in all manner of foolery for 
the sake of catching husbands. But what does 
watching avail, if the fear of God in the child 
does not guard the door.—Ver. 37. If the child’s 
desire to remain unmarried agrees with the will 
of the parents, such a child is blessed in its re- 
lease from many cares in the life she has chosen. 
—Ver. 39. He who would do or suffer anything for 
the Lord, must first de in the Lord, and hold 
communion with Him by faith.—Ver. 40. It is 
not mere solitude that makes the widow blessed; 
she is so, provided only that she places her hope 
in God, and continues day and night in prayer 
and supplication (1 Tim. v. 5). 

Beriens. brpeL:—ver. 27. Men would often 
gladly part from that they have, and seek that 
they have not. Let each one take heed to his 
own spirit.—Ver. 28. Great confusions arise from 
affirming that to be sin which is not. Married 
people may have more troubles in the flesh; but 
single people also have their own temptations, 
which may easily choke the Word. Watchful- 
ness is the best safeguard. A pious man is cau- 
tious and self-distrustful.—Ver. 29. With Chris- 
tians of the present day, time often hangs heavy ; 
hence pastimes and amusements are sought for. 
Let us rather work while the day lasts, ere the 
night comes, for time isshort, Therefore hasten, 
O Soul! Seetoitthat thou lovest God! We have 
no hundred years leisure for keeping vigils with 
God.—Even in marriage we have opportunities 
for self-denial, and, when occasion calls, we can 
let all its good things go in obedience to the Di- 
vine will. But such self-denial can neither be 
undertaken arbitrarily, nor for the parade of 
holiness, nor in self-wrought labor, but only in 
dependence on the mercy of God, into whose 
hands,alone those should yield themselves, who 
have long become ashamed, despairing of their 
own strength, and feel their need of higher 
aid. And this aid comes with earnest prayer, 
and strenuous struggles against sin, and with 
fervent desires for the love of God in Jesus 
Christ. His urgent entreaties, and winning at- 
tractions draw the heart away and beyond itself, 
to live in the light and under the sight of God, 
so that all it does, however trivial, shall be done 
in God. So should it be with all things in 
this world; we should learn to lay them all 
down for God, and so restrain ourselves that 
the beart may be freely lifted heavenward. 
Even whatsoever is most seemly and innocent, 
should be held and used as if we had it not. Our 
aim should be to strengthen the weak senses by 
becoming earnestness, and in sorrow to be always 








167 





rejoicing (2 Cor. vi. 10); not to carry out our 
enjoyments into the flesh, but to rejoice with 
trembling; and to cleave to nothing which may 
be taken from us at any hour. In this we can 
succeed only through prayer. Prayer, while it 
knits us to God, severs us from self. He who 
cleaves to himself easily clings to things which 
may yet enhance his suffering. But he who is 
free cleaves only to God, and whatever is not in 
God, appears foreign to him. Ah, then, cast 
aside everything which hinders communion with 
Christ.—Ver. 31. What is transient is the fash- 
ion and the quality, the show and the glitter, 
the outward form, or, as it now appears, the 
present quiet peaceful state, of this world which 
is spared unto Christians. How all this will 
pass away we need not care to know; but only 
that we pass not away with it.—Ver. 82. God 
forbids only the care which distracts and tor- 
ments. It is not His intention that we should 
be entirely free from all cares. Cares will come; 
only we must take heed and not be absorbed in 
them.—The celibacy of such pure souls only as 
are indifferent, and unconcerned about all events, 
who have nothing which pleases them aside from 
Jesus, who entirely renounce the friendships 
of the world, and everything which is sweet, 
and dear, and pleasant to the flesh, is properly 
sanctified; they alone are fit to walk confidingly 
with God.—Ver. 33. A married man often finds 
himself constrained, or is of himself inclined to 
consider how he may please his wife, who is 
frequently exacting even when she has enough. 
But so is the progress heavenward hindered, if 
the man becomes ensnared in earthly occupations. 
Yet God can aid such in other ways; and so also 
believers when married, can and should attend 
to Divine things as well even in the midst of 
their work.—Ver. 34. She only is the true virgin 
who cares solely for the work of the Lord, and 
does the will of her bridegroom.—A married 
woman often sticks fast under the burden of 
worldly things, and is obliged to endeavor to 
suit her husband. In such a relation what 
chances may not befall!—Think on this, how 
thou art pleasing Christ—that husband who has 
delivered thee from the service of sin; and take 
heed that thou wanderest not from Him with 
a roving heart. This heart must be wholly de- 
voted to thy true bridegroom, who would fain 
possess thee wholly.—Ver. 385. Even the best 
doctrines closely resemble fetters upon the con- 
science. Conscience is a very tender thing. If 
aman is to return to God and become one with 
Him in highest blessedness, he must cleave to 
God without reserve, and learn to abide in Him 
with all his powers. Can we enjoy perfect com- 
munion if one-half of us clings to the creature? 
The best and nearest way to perfect blessedness, 
is to free ourselves, more and more from the 
stains of our shameful apostacy; and it is a part 
of this work to withdraw the body also from the 
filth of the world, that it may be presented as an 
offering to the eternal Creator, in all holy ser- 
vice. If a person is bound in spirit to a creature, 
much energy of will, and much precious time is 
withdrawn from God. Yet the Good Spirit would 
not hereby intimate either that the marriage 
state was damnable, nor the single state alone 
beatific. But this is the meaning: that God 


168 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





wishes to have the entire man unto Himself, for 
His possession and enjoyment, and that we must 
wholly offer up, and surrender ourselves to Him, 
body, soul, and spirit, to be by Him sanctified 
and preserved. And then he tells us how well 
such persons should live, and how such an in- 
ward independence of all outward things, is yet 
possible, so that those who are married should 
be, and remain, as if they were not; and finally, 
what great happiness would arise among mar- 
ried people, who in their earnest conflict with 
the flesh, with mutual accord learn to refrain 
from all things in order to please the Lord and 
His pure Spirit.—Ver. 36. Everything must, at 
all events, turn upon the person’s will, that no- 
thing be done in a legal spirit. Christ wants 
our will for a bride, not for a slave. Our na- 
ture furnishes material for good, and for evil, 
but grace must prepare it.—Reason is not to be 
deified, and neither also is it to be contemned.— 
Ver. 37. If the will of man is armed with the 
Gospel, it can accomplish more than the severest 
vows made under the law. An indescribably 


— 


kingly power lies in the will of man—in his will 
disenthralled'and endowed with the energies of 
the Gospel, when he comes to exercise confidence 
and courage in God, so that he is able resolutely 
to determine on anything he deems to be for the 
glory of God and the good of others.—Ver. 38. 
Marriage stands between a better state in the 
spirit, and a worse one in the flesh.—Ver. 39, 
40. If both parties are related in the Lord, then 
is their marriage sanctified. 

Besser :—Vers. 29-31. This is the true vir- 
ginity common to all Christians, that what they 
have during their short lives here does not 
sunder them from their heavenly possessions, or 
detain them on their journey.—Ver. 35. God’s 
prohibitions are not snares for the Christian, but 
gentle bridlings of the Spirit, who expresses 
himself in the spiritual law (Rom. vii. 14); but 
man’s interdicts which forbid what God allows 
(1 Tim. iv. 1-8), are snares by which the con- 
sciences of men are bound away from God and 
to other things in superstitious thraldom. 


CHAPTERS VIII-X. 


THE RELATION OF THE STRONG AND LIBERAL-MINDED TOWARDS THE WEAK, IN 
THINGS INDIFFERENT. 


Cuapter VIII. 1-13. 


A.—WNot knowledge, but love the rule. 


Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have know- 


2 ledge. 


Knowledge puffeth up, but charity [love] edifieth. 


And [om. And'] if 


any man think that he knoweth [has known’] anything, he knoweth [has known®] 


God but one. 


are all things, and we by him. 


© co | o> Or He CO 


nothing yet* as he ought to know. But if any man love God, the same is known of 
him. As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice 
unto idols, we know that an idol 7s nothing in the world, and that there is none other® 
For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in 
earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the 
Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom 
Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: 
for some with conscience® of the idol unto this hour’ eat 7¢ as a thing offered unto an 
idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. But meat commendeth [will not 
affect*] us not to [before] God: for [om. for*] neither, if we eat, are we the better 
[worse]; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse [better’®]. 


But take heed lest by 


any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling-block to them that are weak." 


10 


For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall 


not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened [edified, οἰχοδομηϑήσεται) ta 


1] 


eat those things which are offered to idols; And [For] through’ thy knowledge shall 


[om. shall] the weak brother [om. brother'’] perish, [perishes'‘—the brother] for whom 


CHAP. VIII. 1-13. 169 





12 Christ died? But when ye sin 80 against the brethren, and wound their weak con- 
13 science, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will 
eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend. 


1 Ver. 2.—The Rec. has δέ after ἔι, [according to D. Εἰ. F. G. Κ΄. L. Syr. and many Gr. fathers! but this is a connection 
not found in good codices [A. B.] and is rejected by the best critics [Meyer, Lach., Alf., Stanley]. 

2 Ver. 2—Rec. and Meyer [and Alford] read εἰδέναι [according to J. Κ΄. and some Greek fathers] but Tisch. [Stanley] 
and others, ἐγνωκέναι, which is more strongly supported [A. B. Ὁ. E. F.G.] but is regarded by Meyer as a sort of Gloss 
made to suit what goes before and after. 

3 Ver. 2.—Lach. [Stan.] read ἔγνω [with A. B. D.1F.G. But ἔγνωκεν is preferred by Meyer, Alf., and others, according 
to D2 E. J. K.]. The κε was probably dropped out in consequence of the eye of the transcriber passing from x of the κεν 
to k of the καθώς following. 

4 Ver. 2.Lach. and others [Stanley] read οὔπω ἔγνω, according to good authorities, A. B. and others, but Meyer deems 
it as probably not original—{not found D. E. F.G. J. K. and Alf., says that “ probably after the erasure of οὐδέν as unne. 
cessary, οὐδέπω thus standing alone was altered to ov7w.” | 

5 Ver. 4.— Erepos is rejected by Lach. [Stan.] according to important authorities. But the rejection can be better ex® 
plained than the insertion. [It is found in J. K. most Syr. MSS. and in the Greek fathers} (comp. Meyer). 

6 Ver. 7.—Lach. [Tischen. Stan.] and others read συνηθείᾳ, in intercourse with, not without good support, [A. B. and 
many versions]; but συνειδήσει is the more difficult reading [found in Ὁ. E. F.G.J.,in most MSs., and the Gr. fathers, 
‘‘The great weight of authority is in favor of the common reading.” Hopae]. 

7 Ver. 7.—In the Rec. ἕως ἄρτῖ, until now, comes after τοῦ εἰδώλου---ἃ change on account of the difficult structure; 
but it is poorly sustained. {The true reading is συνειδήσει ἔως ἄρτι τοῦ εἰδώλου. “with conscience until now of the 
idol,” and so also Alf., who says ‘the transposition was made, apparently for the purpose of bringing the clauses logically 
connected more closely together Ἶ. 

8 Ver. 8.—The παρίστησι of the Rec. was occasioned by the present tenses of the following clauses, [and is found in 
D.E.J. The true reading παραστήσει, occurs in A. B. several cursives—and Gr. fathers, and is adopted by Tisch., Lach., 
Alf., Stan.]. 

Ὁ Ver. dt προ yap after οὔτε is an interpolation [not found in A. B. and other good authorities]. 

10 Ver. 8._[Kling inverts the order of these two clauses according to Ὁ. E. F.G. J. therein following Tisch., Meyer, 
Lach. Ed.]. 

ll ven oe Rec. ἀσθενοῦσιν is apparently a correction to suit ἀσθενῶν below; ἀσθενέσιν is found in A. B. Ὁ. Ε΄. 
F. G.” ALr.]. 

12 Ver. 11. Ey instead of ἐπί is well authorized; Meyer regards it a gloss for the less common ἐπί; [see note]. 

18 Ver. 11.—The ἀδελφός of Rec. is feebly supported [not being found in A. B. Ὁ. E. F.G., and is omitted by all the later 
critical editions. ‘O ἀδελφός, however, appears after γνώσει in A. B. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.] 

14 Ver. 11.—The Fut. ἀπολεῖται of the Rec. was made to correspond with the foregoing οἴκοδομηθ. [and is found in D.3 
E. F.G.J. The pres. ἀπόλλυται appears in A. B. D.1 and in several ancient versions. Alf. says: “The sentence has proba- 
bly been tampered with to get rid of the apparent awkwardness of the question being carried on through ver. 11.” Some 
authorities put καὶ before awoA., Which Kling calls a gloss for γάρ understood; others have γάρ, and others still, οὖν after 


ἀπόλ.] 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


The instructions and exhortations contained 
in this paragraph, relate to a still further ques- 
tion proposed to the Apostle in the letter from 
Corinth, and to the conflict which had arisen in 
consequence, between two parties in the Church. 
On the one side were those who, as they believed 
in the nothingness of idolatry, and were fully 
conscious of their Christian liberty in reference 
to all that which was not in conflict with the 
nature of their calling, maintained their perfect 
right to buy and eat the meat offered for sale in 
the market, which had been sacrificed to idols, 
and also to partake of that which was set be- 
fore them at table in the houses of heathen—yea, 
even to participate at their sacrificial feasts,* 
because, as they affirmed, this flesh was like all 
other flesh, and that in partaking of it they 
came into no injurious counection with idols, 
since idols were nothing in themselves, and so, 
incapable of harm. On the other side were those 





*[{On this point Stanley remarks; ‘“ Most public enter- 
tainments and many private meals were more or less re- 
motely the accompaniments of sacrifice; most animals killed 
for butcher’s meat had fallen by the hand of the sacrificer; 
the very word for ‘feast’ in Hebrew was identical with 
‘sacrifice,’ and from thence in Hellenistic Greek, the word 
originally used for ‘ killing in sacrifice’ (θύειν), was diverted 
to the general signification of ‘killing’ (Acts x.13). This 
identification of sacrifice and feast was carried to the highest 
pitch among the Greeks. ‘Sacrifices’ are enumerated by 
Aristotle (Eth. VIII.. 9, 5) and Thucydides (II. 38) among 
the chief means of social enjoyment; and, in this later age 
of Greece, it may well be conceived that the religious ele- 
ment was even still more entirely thrown into the shade by 
the festive character of the meal which followed.’’—These 
feasts, it must be remembered, were ordinarily held in the 
temples themselves. (See Judg.ix. 27; Enead. VII. Book 
174; Herodot. I. 31)]. 





who utterly reprobated such conduct, and deemed 
it pollution; for they still believed idols to be 
veritable, active agents, that exerted a malign 
and defiling influence on those who in any way 
came in contact with them—as, for example, those 
seemed to, who ate of the flesh of beasts sacri- 
ficed to them. That the latter were heathen 
and not Jewish converts, is to be inferred from 
verse 7th, where the expression: ‘unto this 
hour,” points to the continuance of an earlier 
state, and implies, that those spoken of had been 
heathen, and were still held captive by their old 
heathenish notions about the reality of idol 
gods whom they had come to regard as subject 
to the one supreme God. This inference cannot 
be disputed; although it must be conceded also 
that even by the Jews (Jewish converts) idols 
were regarded as demons, that were exerting a 
veritable power in heathendom, and exercised a 
baleful and defiling influence upon all those who 
in any way came in contact with heathen forms 
of life. [‘*To offer ‘polluted bread’ upon the 
altar of the Lord, or to eat the meat of idolatrous 
princes, had been condemned by the warning of 
Malachi (i. 7-12), the good example of Daniel 
(i. 8), and Tobit (i. 10, 11), and the evil example 
of Israel at Baalpeor (Numbers xxy. 2; Ps. evi. 
28).” Srantey]. And this class also must be 
supposed to have felt a holy horror at the pol- 
luted meat, and shown no little solicitude as to 
the manner it was to be dealt with. The dispute 
which thus originated, we have no reason to be- 
lieve had anything to do with the party divisions 
spoken of in chap. 1. There is no propriety, 
therefore, in supposing that the more stringent, 
scrupulous ones, belonged to the party calling 
themselves after Cephas or after Christ; although 


170 





it were more plausible to regard the more liberal- 
minded as belonging rather to the Paulinists, or 
Apollinarians. 

In his theoretic convictions Paul, as we shall 
see, sides with the liberals. But he rebukes 
their reckless application of these principles, 
and also that pride of knowledge which they 
manifested; and for the regulation of their con- 
duct in this case, he enjoins the exercise of a 
self-denying love, that subordinated the use of 
its liberty, to a regard for weak brethren, and 
gladly renounced its rights in order to avoid all 
occasions for scandal. And in support of his in- 
junction he points to his own example as set 
forth in his official labors. (chap. 9th). 

[ΤῊ importance of the controversy which 
thus arose is obvious. Closely as the whole so- 
cial life of the ancient world was interwoven 
with its religious worship, the decision of this 
question affected the whole relations of the 
Christian society with its heathen neighbors ; 
and, in fact, involved all the similar, though 
more complicated questions, discussed in the 
first four centuries of the Christian Church, re- 
specting the lawfulness of attending on the spec- 
tacles or receiving the honors of the Roman Em- 
pire. Accordingly, this, although the chief, is 
not the only passage in which the point is dis- 
cussed. See Rom. xiv. 2, 21;. Rev. ii. 14, 15; 
Acts xv. 29.” Srantey]. 

Ver. 1-6. Now concerning.—[Here we have 
the introduction of a new topic with περὶ δὲ, just 
as in chap. vii.],—idol sacrifices, — εἰδωλο- 
ϑύτων. This is a topic which we see to have al- 
ready been brought up in discussion, and a de- 
cision rendered upon it in the first council at 
Jerusalem (Acts xy. 29). To that decision it is 
remarkable that Paul makes no allusion. [‘ Pro- 
bably this is to be traced to his wish to establish 
his position as an independent Apostle, endowed 
with the Holy Spirit sufficiently himself to regu- 
late such matters.” ALrorp].—We know that 
we all have knowledge.—[ Many commenta- 
tors regard these words as quoted from the 
Epistle to the Corinthians, and assented to, at 
the start, in a general way, and in a conciliatory 
manner. They are not, therefore, to be inter- 
preted strictly, nor is ‘‘all” to be emphasized. 
Kling questions this view (see below), but hardly 
on sufficient grounds. It is quite in the spirit 
of Paul]. From ver. 1 to ver. 3, there is a logi- 
cal parenthesis, as may be seen from the resump- 
tion of these words in ver. 4. Before the con- 
tents of the knowledge here alluded to are brought 
out, he introduces an observation respecting 
knowledge and love, designed to furnish a rule 
for the whole subject. This parenthesis some 
[Luther, Bengel, Griesb., Winer, Bloom., Olsh.], 
regard as beginning with the words: ὅτε πάντες, 
which is then construed as a casual sentence, 
and the meaning would be: ‘*We know,—(be- 
cause, or for, (ὅτι) we all have knowledge,” 
[—‘we as well as you’). Orsu.]. But, in such a 
case, the clause following ought to read: ἡ de 
γνῶσις, but knowledge,” ete. It is also opposed 
by ver. 4, where the ὅτε following οἴδαμεν, we 
know, plainly means, as it does here, that. The 
parenthesis, then, must begin with the clause: 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


Calv., Meyer, Alford]. The ‘things offered to 
idols’ were the remnants of victims, whose bitter 
portions only had been offered in sacrifice, the 
rest falling partly to the priests, and partly to 
the offerer. These were sometimes sent to mar- 
ket for public sale, and sometimes appropriated 
to festivals, either at the temple, or in private 
houses. And it was about the propriety of 
Christians eating of these that the question arose. 
The knowledge Paul speaks of, must be under- " 
stood to denote a practical insight into the real 
nature and effects of the things offered (ver. 4); 
from which, however, it by no means follows 
that περί is grammatically dependent on γνῶ- 
σιν ἔχομεν. And certainly it is remarkable 
that while claiming this knowledge for all in ver. 
1, he says precisely the opposite of this in ver. 7: 
‘but all have not this knowledge.” By way of 
reconciling this contradiction, some suppose that 
these words, as also the clause beginning at ver. 
4; “that an idol is nothing ’’—unto the end of 
ver. 6, were taken from the letter of the Corin- 
thian Church, and that Paul contradicts these in 
ver. 7. But in this case Paul would not have in- 
troduced these words without some formula of 
citation; [but is this necessary when some senti- 
ment of another is simply re-affirmed?] and he 
would have included the observation (ver. 1-3) 
in his counter statement; [not necessarily, for 
that was directly suggested by the word γνῶσις, 
and should follow upon 1.1. Others make a dis- 
tinction between γνῶσες andy γνῶσις, taking 
the former to mean a certain degree of know- 
ledge in general, and the latter a definite insight 
into the relation between the form and the influ- 
ence of idolatry. (Olsh.). But this is arbitrary, 
since yvaoic, knowledge, is already defined as to 
its contents in vv. 1 and 4. Another supposi- 
tion is, that the Apostle is speaking generally 
and theoretically in ver. 1, and then in ver. 7, 
with direct reference to the Corinthians (De 
Wette [Stanley, Hodge, Alford]). But with this 
the πάντες in ver. 1, compared with ver. 7, does 
not suit. [But why not? As Alford says: ‘* The 
common sense view of two such statements would, 
in ordinary preaching or writing be, that the 
first was said of what is professed and confessed, 
the second of what is actually and practically 
apprehended by each man. Thus we may say 
of our people in the former sense, ‘all are Chris- 
tians; all believe in Christ ;’ but in the latter, ‘all 
are not Christians; ,all do not believe’’’]. Still 
again, a fourth device is to apply ἐν ma@ouv, 
in all, to strangers coming to Corinth (Schra- 
der); but of this the text gives no hint. Fi- 
nally, the existence of the “knowledge in all,” 
is distinguished from the “having knowledge,” 
as being more thorough-going, while the latter 
is supposed to imply a more superficial know- 
ledge; but this is arbitrary. The simplest solu- 
tion of the difficulty is [?], that in ver. 1 Paul is 
speaking of himself, together with the more li- 
beral-minded; but in ver. 7, where he speaks in 
the third person of all, he takes the word in & 
wider sense; so Theoph. and Meyer. In this 
case there would be no necessity for resorting to 
the supposition of an ironical statement (Gro- 
tius), which would be inconsistent with the gene- 





‘‘knowledge puffeth up’’—a thought suggested | ral tenor of what is said in the following verse. 


by what just precedes. [So Chrys., Beza, Grot., 


The disposition to pride oneself on this posses 


CHAP. VIII. 1-13. 





‘sion of knowledge, he earnestly opposes, by | leads (dei—oportet). Some adopting the reading, 


condemning those aspects in which it showed it- 
self, as among the liberals of the Corinthian 
Church.—Knowledge puffeth up.—[The pa- 
renthesis is introduced without any particle of 
connection. This abruptness of transition is 
characteristic of Paul, and indicates the rapid 
rush of his thought. It makes an impression of 
force, which must not be weakened by any at- 
tempt to supply the lack. ““Ἢ γνῶσις, knowledge, 
abstract,—scil. when alone, or improperly pre- 
dominant, knowledge, barely.” Aurornp]. This 
higher insight so much prized—this knowledge 
which professes to rise superior to all manner 
of prejudices, wherever it prevails for its own 
sake alone, proves an element far removed 
from Christian perfection,—yea, injurious to it 
through the influence it exerts on the person 
possessing it. Its effect is to fill the mind with 
pride, and so to undermine the foundation of that 
perfection, and disqualify the possessor for fur- 
thering the same among others; since for this 
work there is required, above all things, conde- 
scension of spirit,—a disposition to enter hum- 
bly into the position and necessities of those 
whom we would instruct. This, however, is 
just what love (ἀγάπη) begets,—but love edi- 
fieth.— In opposition to the self-exaltation, 
manifested by those who, with their higher in- 
sight, look down upon others as narrow and 
bigoted, love empties a person of self, and 
prompts him to enter into another’s condition, 
and makes him ready for every service, even to 
the offering up of his own for others’ benefit. 
Accordingly, while knowledge works injuriously 
and destructively upon the Christian life of 
others (comp. vv. 9-12), love works edifyingly, 
building up that life either in the salvation of a 
brother, or in the well-being of the Church 
(comp. οἰκοδομεῖν, chap. xiv. 24; Rom. xiv. 19; 
Eph. iv. 12; and Osiander, in hoc loco). ‘‘The 
thought and expression in οἰκοδομεῖ, edifieth, is 
altogether peculiar to Paul’s mode of looking at 
and speaking of things. The whole Christian 
life is contemplated by him asa building, rest- 
ing on the one foundation, Jesus Christ—a figure 
which finds a point of connection with our Lord’s 
statement concerning the house built on the rock 
and on the sand. The edification here meant 
combines the theoretical and practical eiements, 
and comprises every thing which serves to ad- 
vance the Christian life.” NEAnpER. The con- 
trast thus briefly indicated, is now further ex- 
panded. While the ‘knowledge which puffs up” 
is stigmatized as something purely imaginary, 
as something which in its very effects shows 
itself to be wanting in the truth, love, on the 
other hand, is declared to possess the highest 
intelligence.—If any one thinks that he has 
known any thing.—In place of γνῶσις, he 
here puts, δοκεῖ εἰδέναι (ἐγνωκένα") τι; 
and to a person of this sort he denies any such 
knowledge of a thing as one ought to possess. — 
He as yet knows nothing as he ought to 
know it—(ckavoc δεῖ γνῶναι). By this 
he means that full, deep, penetrating, exhaus- 
tive, morally effective knowledge, which, as a 
moral necessity in the sphere of true religion, 
exists in Christianity, and to which Christianity, 
wherever it has its full moral effect, inevitably 


οὕπω ἔγνω, take καϑὼς δεῖ γνῶναν as the objective 
clause to ἔγνω: ‘he has not the substance of that 
knowledge which belongs to it;’ ‘he has not ap- 
prehended it;’ but this is contrary to the usage 
of καϑῶς. The full, entire morally effective 
knowledge, exists only where Jove is (comp. ch. 
xiii. 2). [Hodge’s comments on the profound- ἡ 
ness of this seemingly incidental aphorism of 
Paul are excellent. He concludes: ‘‘The rela- 
tion between the cognitive and emotional facul- 
ties, is one of the most difficult problems in 
philosophy. In many systems they are regarded 
as distinct. Paul here teaches that with regard 
to a large class of objects, knowledge without 
feeling is nothing; it supposes the most essen- 
tial characteristics of the object to be unper- 
ceived. And in the following verse he teaches 
that love is the highest form of knowledge. To 
know God is to love him; and to love him is to 
know him. Love is intelligent, and knowledge 
is emotional. Hence, the Apostle says, If a man 
thinketh that he knoweth any thing; that is, if 
he is proud or conceited, he isignorant’”’]. From 
this we should now expect the statement to fol- 
low: ‘but if any one loves, he knows as he 
ought to know.’ But Paul at once mounts 
higher. Proceeding from the love of neighbor 
to its root in the love of God, and from human 
knowledge to its fountain-head, even Divine 
knowledge, he says:—But if any man loves 
God, the same is known by him.—Where 
love for God exists,—of which love his affection 
for his neighbor is the essential consequence and 
expression (comp. 1 Jno. iv. 20),—there the indi- 
vidual is known by God. God has, in knowing 
him, taken him up into Himself, and by this he 
is translated into the sphere of the spiritual light . 
and life of God, whence there streams into him 
the very light of knowledge. Thus the being 
known by God has intelligence for its essential 
results, even as the love of God begets in us the 
love of neighbor, (brotherly love). ‘‘The active 
knowledge of God follows the passive knowledg& 
He was known, and, therefore, he knoweth.” 
BenceL. (Comp. Osiander: ‘the assimilation 
of love and knowledge with their objects”). 
Without recognizing this inward connection, 
Meyer says, Ed. 8: ‘‘ This is a case of pregnant . 
construction. Instead of saying in full:—‘ such 
a person not simply has knowledge of the right 
sort, but is also himself known of God,’ Paul: 
simply states the latter, the more important 
thing, from which the former is understood of 
itself. The fact of being known by God, exhib- 
its the high worth of love, for if Ged knows a. 
man, there is presupposed in this no indifferent 
and ineffective relation of God to man, but an 
activity of God which passes over upon the man, 
so that he, as the object of the Divine knowledge, 
experiences also the efficacy of that kindly feel- 
ing in which and with which God knows him, 
and hence becomes a partaker of His love, and 
of His kindly care, ete. The idea consequently 
is that of an effective knowledge on the part of 
God, which becomes an inward experience on the 
part of man, a knowledge which is causa salutis, 
so that God in knowing the man, carries out in 
him that salvation which had been decreed in 
His own counsels.” That the Divine knowledge 


172 





includes in itself a loving participation and com- 
placency, is clear,also from other passages (Jno. 
x. 14; 2 Tim. ii. 19; Gal. iv.9; Matth. vii. 23; 
Ps. i.6). This is all evacuated in the explana- 
tion: approbatus est (Grot. and others); and that 
given by Calvin: inter filios censeri, goes beyond 
the meaning of the word. But the Hophal con- 
struction: edoctus est, is taught by Him, adopted 
by Néssett and others [Augustine, Beza, Locke, 
Mackn., Hodge, Bloomf.], and also by the Church 
fathers, is directly contrary both to the usages 
of the New Testament and of the classic Greek. 
Yet it was very natural to one accustomed to 
the Hebrew forms of thought and speech, as 
Paul was]. Billroth hits the truth more nearly 
when he translates the phrase: ‘God perceives 
Himself in him;’ but he puts it in a speculative, 
pantheistic form. The mystical view of Olshau- 
sen, that in γινώσκεσϑαι, the bridal relation of 
the soul to God is indicated, goes both too far 
and not far enough—too far, in as much as the 
context alone affords the analogy; not far 
enough, in as much as the relation, not of the 
bride, but of the bridegroom is indicated by the 
word γινώσκειν, when taken in a sexual sense. 

In ver. 4. the Apostle turns to the exposition 
of the subject in hand, which is at once defined 
more particularly —concerning therefore 
the eating of things offered to idols.— 
[ὙΠῸ οὖν, ‘therefore is epanaleptic, and sim- 
ply resumes the thread of: discourse” ].—And 
the thing known is,—that no idol exists in 
the world (ὅτε οὐδεν ἔιδωλον ἐν κόσμῳ). 
—Judging from the position of the words, and 
from the parallel clause, we can hardly separate 
οὐ δεν from the subject, and make it a predicate 
as if it were: ‘is nothing:’ [as in the E. V., 
comp. x. 19; Jno. xxi. 24; Jer.x.3]. He means 
that there is no such thing as an idol in the 
whole world of realities. Of course it will be 
understood that by the word ‘idol,’ not the 
image, but the object represented by it—the idol 
god is meant. To this he denies all reality, 
within the sphere of existing things. But ac- 
cording to ver. 5, and chap. x. 20, this cannot be 
taken to mean the veritable non-existence of the 
objects of heathen worship, but only that they 
do not actually exist in the form conceived and 
honored by the heathen, e. g., in the forms of a 
Jupiter, Apollo, e/c..—that these as divinities 
dwelling in the images are but heathen fantasies, 
and that there is no god, but the One. The εἰ 
μή is to be referred simply to οὐδείς. 

This statement, that there is no other god but 
One, he at once proceeds to explain and confirm 
in vv. 5 and 6.—For even supposing that.— 
Kizep, which, when the main clause confirms and 
intensifies the hypothetical one, means, if indeed, 
if otherwise, if namely, in those instances where 
the latter is contrasted with the former, is to be 
translated, even if, or although indeed(Passow I., 2, 
197).—there are.—Eic: from its antecedent po- 
‘sition, carries the emphasis, and in both clauses 
denotes not merely ideal existence in the opinion 
of the heathen, but real existence asis evident from 
the subsequent confirmatory ὥσπερ ecici.—those 
called gods.—By the epithet ‘called’ (λεγόμενοι) 
he here limits the seeming concession, and brings 


his statement into harmony with ver. 4,—they are | Dan. x. 18). 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





which the heathen imagine.—whether in heav-: 
en, or whether upon earth.—The terms em- 
brace the whole sphere of pagan divinities, [whe 
were scattered about, occupying distinct realms 
above and below, and thus stood in marked contrast 
with the Christian’s God, who filled all things]. 
This clause is not to be connected with the fol. 
lowing, and so made to imply that by “gods” 
were meant the good angels resident in heaven, 
and by ‘‘lords” the demons precipitated to earth, 
as some suppose.—as there are gods many 
and lords many.—/[There is a question as to 
the real import of this parenthesis. Does it con- 
cede the fact that there are supernatural powers 
that are entitled to the name of “gods” and - 
‘‘lords,” carrying the chief emphasis in the 
word ‘‘are?” or are we to supply the word ‘so 
called,’ and regard it as merely stating that the 
imaginary deities of the heathen were many in 
number? The latter is the more common view, 
adopted by de Wette, Stanley, Barnes, Scott, etc. 
But the former is best maintained as being most 
in accordance with the position of the words, 
and entirely in harmony with Scripture doctrine. 
Hodge referring to Deut. x. 17; Jos. xxii. 22; 
Dan. ii. 47, says: ‘‘These passages show that the 
words god and lord are applied in a wide sense 
to other beings than to the true God.” And 
while it must be affirmed that ‘the whole hea- 
then mythology is a fable—there are demons in 
abundance, of various ranks and powers, called 
gods. The two things which the Apostle means 
to deny are: 1. The existence of such beings as 
the heathen conceived their gods to be. 2. The 
real divinity of those supernatural beings, who 
do really exist, and are called gods; they are 
mere creatures.” Such is essentially the inter- 
pretation of Meyer and Alford. But Kling says]: 
It might be inferred from x, 20, that the beings 
intended were demons, the κοσμοκράτορες of Eph. 
vi. 12; comp. il. 2. But it is by no means ne- 
cessary in this verse to look for a declaration 
respecting the reality of the objects of heathen 
worship; since, as we have seen the words 
εἴπερ εἰσὶ may also express a hypothetical 
putting of a case, where the speaker plants him- 
self upon a position of doubt. Neander says: 
‘‘ Blot, are, expresses nothing but a subjective ~ 
reality. The subjective stand-points of the reli- 
gious consciousness are merely put into objective 
statement; qg. d.: ‘with the heathen heaven and 
earth are peopled with divinities; we, however, 
recognize but one God and Lord ;—in general 
there are many gods, but only for the heathen.’” 
—By not connecting the clause: ‘‘ whether in 
heaven or earth,” with this, so as to carry the 
implication that the term gods referred to the 
good angels still found above, and the term lords 
to those who had been precipitated to earth and 
there become demons, we might be left at liberty 
to refer both these terms to the angels, who are 
called gods, on account of their participation in 
the Divine majesty and worth, as the types and 
representatives of the same, and lords on ac- 
count of the influence they exerted in their own 
spheres and their active relations to each other 
(in their higher and lower orders), as well to 
mankind and subordinate creatures (Ps. cix. 4; 
Comp. Osiander, who at the most 


only called gods, and are not the Divine powers | concedes ‘‘a secondary reference to the demons 


CHAP. VIII. 1--18. 





here, in so far as they had an original part with 
the good, and also a show of divinity with a cer- 
tain degree of reality still cleaving to them.” 

Ver. 6 contains now the positive declaration, 
corresponding to the εἰ μὴ cic. The connection 
is: ‘although so-called gods exist, yet they have 
nothing to do with us Christians; they stand in 
no relation to us, and exert therefore no influence 
upon us,—are for us, as if they werenot.—But for 
us there is only one God, the Father,from 
whom are all things, and we unto him, 
and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom 
are all things, also we through him.— 
Since we in faith hold communion with the one 
God, the Father, who is the source of all things, 
and on whom all things depend,—yea even those 
‘“‘gods many” whom the heathen worship, and 
who is the goal of our existence,—for whose 
glory we live and in whose service we therefore 
stand; and since we hold communion with the 
one Lord who mediates the being and condition 
of all things,—yea, even of the lords many, 
whom the heathen fear, and who is the mediator 
of our existence, viz., of that by virtue of which, 
the one God the Father has become our end, and 
therefore of our new divinely consecrated life: 
therefore are we delivered from all the power and 
all the controlling influences of those gods and 
lords; and those things, which the heathen sup- 
pose to be related to them and to mediate their 
influence—such as the flesh offered in sacrifice,— 
have for us none of this significance; they be- 
long to the ‘all things,’ which are from God and 
through Christ, and can inflict no injury upon 
our new life, which has God for its object, and 
is mediated through Christ. The ἀλλά as chap. 
iv. 15. 

The expression ‘“‘the Father,” indicates that 
which Christians have in God. ‘It brings out 
prominently the contrast between the stand- 
points of the heathen and the Christian; for the 
heathen have no father in this sense. God has 
become a Father to Christians only, by redemp- 
tion.”” Neanper. From this proceeds their spi- 
-ritual childhood; hence it was not necessary to 
add: ‘and we from Him;’ and the statement: 
‘we unto Him’ has its foundation already. By 
the words, ‘‘from Him” (ἐξ οὗ) God is set forth 
as the creative principle; but these are to be no 
more construed according to the Pantheistic 
theory of emanation, than the words, ‘unto 
Him” (εἰς αὐτόν) can be taken to denote a cor- 
responding absorption of all things in Him. 
But the ‘all things,” must in both clauses be 
alike understood, of the sum total of the uni- 
verse, and be referred to the natural creation, 
whose mediator is the Son of God (comp. Col. i. 
16); just as much as He is the Mediator of the 
new spiritual creation, which is implied in ‘we 
through Him” (comp. Eph. ii. 10). In ἡμεῖς 
εἰς αὑτόν, aS well as in ἡμεῖς δὶ αὐτοῦ, the 
phraseology turns into the demonstrative, as in 
ch, vil. 18. To take εἰς αὐτόν, unto Him, as 
equivalent toév airy, in Him, is by no means 
required by the relation of the two phrases, and 
is contrary to usage. It designates here the 
destination or tendency to communion with God, 
and with this to the.recognition and the honor of 
God. But by ‘‘we” in this connection, we are 
to understand, not men in general, but believers. 











173 





—<And by the term “lord” as distinguished from 
“‘God,” he intends as little to deny the divine 
equality, or the essential divinity of Jesus, as he 
does by the phrase ‘‘through Him,” as distin- 
guished from ‘from Him:” since the all-em- 
bracing character of His mediatorial work, far 
more than the title “Lord” (comp. ch. i. 2.) 
points conclusively to this very thing (comp. Osi- 
ander ἢ. 1. and Gess. pp. 88 and 51). Among the 
Jews who spoke Greek, κύριος, Lord, was a de- 
signation of Jehovah himself. In this text the 
whole theistic, Christian consciousness is brought 
out. Billroth and Olshausen here find an expo- 
sition of the doctrine of the Trinity; Meyer dis- 
putes it. Certainly we do violence to the words 
if we insist on detecting here an intention to set 
forth this doctrine; its fundamental relations. 
however, are all here denoted. ‘‘God is the ori- 
ginal ground of all existence, Christ is the me- 
diating principle, and God again becomes the final 
cause of all through the operation of the Holy Spi- 
rit.”” NEANDER. In what follows the apostle turns 
to consider the practival side of the question, in 
regard to refraining from eating for the sake of 
the weaker brethren. 

Ver. 7. From what has been said it is plain 
that the eating of sacrificial flesh has for Chris- 
tians, by reason of their higher stand-point of 
faith, no religious significance whatever, and 
can be accordingly nothing defiling. But, he 
continues, this consciousness, this knowledge, is 
not in all. There are some whose Christian 
faith is not yet so emancipated from the religious 
convictions of their old heathen state, and who 
are still in the bonds of their former conscience, 
moulded by heathen ideas. This was in fact an 
infirmity of their new life, and of their Christian 
conscience,—yet an infirmity which was to be 
treated with mildness and consideration:— 
Howbeit there is not in all this know- 
ledge.—In reference to the seeming contradic- 
tion between this and ver. 1, compare what is 
said on ver. 1. The article before γνῶσις; 
knowledge, indicates it as one which has just been 
spoken of, and is equivalent to this.—The anti- 
thetic positive statement is introduced by dé, and 
introduced in such a manner that the reason of 
the weakness of some, perhaps a small portion 
of the church, conspicuously appears. — But 
some in conscience of the idol even un- 
til now eat asa thing offered to an idol,— 
therefore, not as common flesh, which ‘as a 
creature of Godis good” (1 Tim. iv. 4, comp. 1 Cor. 
x. 26), but as something that would bring them 
into real connection with idolatry, (Osiander). 
According to the order in the received text, the 
words ‘‘until now” belong to the verb ‘‘eat;” 
but for critical reasons, these words ought to be 
placed before τοῦ εἰδώλου, ‘the idol,’ and thus 
taken to qualify τῇ συνειδήσει. in conscience, to 
which it is attached without the article, accord- 
ing to classic usage, and as in 2 Cor. xi. 28; 
Phil. i. 26. (comp. Meyer, [Hodge]).—Zvvecdyjoug 
does not mean opinion in general, or judgment, 
or conviction, but, as uniformly in the New Tes- 
tament, it means conscience, a person’s conscivus- 
ness in its moral and religious aspect. Συγνειδῆσις 
του εἰδώλου, then, denotes this consciousness as 
having for its contents or object, an idol, and 
that too, according to the context, as a real in- 


174 





fluential power, just as in 1 Pet. ii. 19, συνειδήσις 
Yeov, means a conscience testifying of God. 
Here it denotes a conscience possessed with the 
idea that an idol is a real being; so that this 
idea influences his judgment in regard to his 
conduct: and in this case it stamps the eating of 
that flesh, as an immoral, sinful act, altering the 
whole religious state and relations of the Chris- 
tian who eats, because it is the eating of some- 
thing connected with a veritable idol, and there- 
fore defiling in its nature.—and their con- 
science being weak.—The weakness is found 
in the fact that it cannot deliver itself from these 
false notions; nor assure the person of the entire 
nullification of his relations to idols and to all 
their defiling influences by his fellowship with 
Christ, or of the restoration of his true relations 
to God, and consequently also to the totality of 
all things, as dependent on God alone and be- 
longing to Him (miorsc—Rom. xiv. 23). By 
reason of this, its weakness, it—is defiled— 
"ἄν @, by eating. The defilement consists in a 
conviction of guilt, the conscience being troubled 
by a sense of the Divine displeasure pervading 
it. ‘Conscience—the moral sentiment of honor 
—the watchman of our moral purity, is itself 
pure so long as it remains true to its own deter- 
minations; hence μολύνεσϑα, to be defiled, is a 
striking expression, denoting the desecration of 
that which according to its nature and intent is 
holy.” Ostanper. If we take the reading ovvy- 
deia,—which may be a correction for συνειδήσει 
on the ground that it was unsuitable, or else a 
gloss—the sense would be: ‘by their habitual 
wontedness to idols, ὦ. e¢., because they had 
hitherto accustomed themselves to idols, had 
held intercourse with them, the idea of their 
presence, especially in the eating of the sacrifi- 
cial flesh, was to them a common one.’ In any 
case the Dative shows the ground on which the 
defilement takes place.—After this exposition of 
the real facts in the case, he proceeds to exhort 
the Corinthians in reference to the conduct which 
the more liberal-minded among them, ought to 
adopt. And first of all he points to the utter in- 
difference of the matter of eating or not eating 
in a religious point of view, and cuts off all pre- 
text for their unwillingness to adapt themselves 
to the weak. 

Ver. 8. But meat will not affect our re- 
lations to God; for neither if we eat are 
we the worse; neither if we eat not are 
we the better.—It is not to be assumed that 
Paul is here citing the language of the Corin- 
thians themselves in vindication of their eating 
of idol sacrifices [Barnes], since there is no for- 
mula of citation. Nor does the supposition of 
Osiander, that he is here obviating the scruples 
of the narrow-minded agree with Osiander’s own 
exposition further onward. [Rather, he is lay- 
ing down a broad principle, applicable to all 
parties, showing the weak the error of their 
scruples, and the strong why they ought to ac- 
commodate themselves to the weak, and not in- 
sist on their rights. This is shown in the selec- 
tion of words, and in the more critically ap- 
proved order of the two latter clauses]. The dé 
is not adversative, but progressive. By many 
παραστήσει is construed as precisely equivalent 
to συνίστημι, to recommend (which also appears in 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





the gloss συνίστησι); but this has no foundation 
in usage. The idea is not that of a presentment 
betore God as a punitive judge (context), nor 
that of an offering in sacrifice (on account of the 
subject βρῶμα, if nothing else), nor yet that of 
a presentation of one’s self for service (for the 
Same reason); rather it is that of placing in spe- 
cific relation, as vox media, so that the two fol- 
lowing clauses may be subsumed under it. Ac- 
cordingly, the meaning is: ‘meat will in no way 
affect our relations to God; neither so that we 
shall lose standing with Him in case we eat not, 
nor so that we shall be better in His sight in 
case we eat.” [So Alford; though Olsh., Robin- 
son, Hodge, Bloomf., keep to the common ren- 
dering. The one given above has, however, the de- 
cided advantage, as it suits with the following 
clauses alike]. This explanation of παραστήσει, 
however, may, perhaps, be too abstract, and we 
might underlay it with a conception of God as 
Judge, and regard the presentation as taking 
place before Him in that capacity; yet it must 
be in such a way as to anticipate alike a favora- 
ble as well as an unfavorable judgment. The 
sense would then be, that meat had no influence 
upon God’s judgment concerning us, to deter- 
mine it in one direction or the other (akin to 
Rom. xiv. 17). So Bengel: ‘‘neither to please 
him in judgment, nor yet to displease him.” 
‘« Paul reminds those who ate idol sacrifices out 
of opposition, in order to demonstrate their libe- 
ral-mindedness, that they by this means were 
not rendered purer and better.”” NeEANDER. 

Ver. 9-13. Here follows the warning itself 
against all reckless use of the liberty [above as- 
serted], or of superior intelligence [in regard to 
it], grounded upon the injury which would 
thereby accrue to the weaker brethren, result- 
ing in great coldness of affection, and in severe 
offences against Christ Himself.— But.—The dé 
is not merely transitional, but also adversative, 
4. d., ‘eating and not eating are, in themselves, 
morally indifferent, but,’ e¢c.—take heed lest 
your power. —’Efovcia—power to do or let 
alone—liberty of choice springing from the in- 
different character of any act in a religious 
point of view—become a stumbling-block 
to the weak.—II pookopya, any thing over 
which a person stumbles and falls; here, an ocea- 
sion to sin by awakening an inclination to imi- 
tate conduct that is in conflict with conscience, 
—[‘‘a practice above all others dangerous to a 
Christian.” ALrorp]. (Com. Rom. xiv. 18, 20). 
This he at once explains more fully—For if 
any man,—. 6., any one who is weak in the 
sense above mentioned.—_see thee who hast 
knowledge (comp. ver. 4) [‘' This seems to 
imply that the weak brother is aware of this, and 
looks up to thee as such.”’ Atr.].—sit at meat, 
[xaraxeiuevov lit. recumbent, the usual posture 
atmeals].—in an 180] 5 temple.—LEidw/ciov, an 
idol temple, just as in 1 Mace. i. 50; x. 88. 
[‘*This is a term used only by Jewish writers, 
apparently to avoid designating heathen tem- 
ples by the sacred word ναῦς, used to express the 
temple at Jerusalem. It 15 ἃ kind of parody on 
the names of temples as derived from the divini- 
ties to which they are dedicated.” Sranuny ]. 
This extreme exercise of liberty he here toxch.: 
upon only in reference to its prejudicial conse- 


! 
: 
, 





CHAP. VIII. 1-13. 





quences. Itis in x. 14 that he first comes to 
oppose it with earnest dissuasions, after he has 
cast light upon it from another side. Some ex- 
positors, for the sake of abating the scandal of 
such procedures, construe εἰδωλεῖον with a local 
signification, making it mean only a feast fur- 
nished with idol sacrifices; but this is contrary 
to usage. Others (Osiander) take it to denote a 
sort of domestic chapel, where sacrificial feasts 
were held; which is not impossible, but very 
doubtful. As a rule, the sacrificial festivals 
were certainly observed in the temple. The 
consequences of beholding a Christian at such 
places, are introduced with an earnest interro- 
gative.—Shall not the conscience of him 
who is weak be edified ?—The verb oixodo- 
μεῖσϑαι is noi equivalent to zmpelli, or confirmari, 
to be determined thereto, to be betrayed, or, to be 
strengthened, 7. e., in the purpose to do something 
not allowable; but, as in the New Testament 
throughout, to be edified,—only that it is here 
used antiphrastically, in an ironic sense. [So 
Alf., Stan., Mey., de Wette. But Hodge, with- 
out good grounds, says the interpretation ‘is 
out of keeping with the whole tone of the pas- 
sage” ]. Itis an edificatio ruinosa, as Calvin ex- 
presses it, a being furthered to something which 
is destructive to a person that is weak in the 
faith (comp. ver. 11)—a bad way of enlarging 
the spiritual edifice, inasmuch as it comes to the 
doing of something heretofore avoided, and that, 
too, without any conviction of its rectitude, but 
simply after the precedent of another who has 
no scruples in the matter, by reason of his supe- 
rior insight, and in comparison with whom one is 
unwilling to seem contracted. Any conjectural 
change of reading is needless. Also thesurrender 
of the interrogative form (on account of oi yz, and 
because then εἰς τό should be equivalent to ἔν τῳ) 
isungrammatical. The assumption that there is a 
play upon words in the Hpistle to the Corinthians 
is gratuitous.—Ver. 11, whether we read with the 
Rec. καὶ ἀπολεῖται, or καὶ ἀπόλλυται, might be 
construed as continuing the question, [as in the 
E. V.]. But it would be more emphatic to sup- 
pose here a new affirmative sentence, —for there 
perishes.—But the most probable text is ἀπόλ- 
Avra yap, for there perishes. And since the for 
created difficulty, some put οὖν, therefore, instead 
of it; others, since they found both γάρ and οὖν 
in different manuscripts, rejected the one as well 
as the other, and wrote «ai before ἀπόλλ. [so 
Lach. and Stanley]. The ydp serves for the 
solving of the antiphrastic irony involved in 
οἰκοδομηϑήσεται, and that, too, in a fearfully em- 
phatic way, qg.d., ‘a fine way of edifying, indeed! 
for, instead of building up, this is a tumbling 
to utter ruin.’ The destruction (ἀπώλεια) here 
meant is the same as ini. 18, viz., the forfeiture 
of salvation, that everlasting destruction which 
comes from acting without faith and against con- 
science; not, as Bengel says, the loss of faith 
itself; and still less, a gradual apostasy or moral 
depravation, or a loss of inward peace. If the 
word is taken passively, is ruined, the guilt of 
the person causing this ruin by the abuse of his 
liberty, will appear still more prominent—over 
this thy knowledge.—Whether we read ἐπὶ, 
or ἐν τῇ σῇ γνώσει, the sense isthe same. We 
have here the cause of the ruin. This is a reck- 











175 





less and unloving use of knowledge. Τῇ σῇ, this 
thy, t. e., ‘which thou hast, and in which thou 
boastest.’ The guilt involved appears enhanced 
still further by three particulars, which stand 
out yet more distinctly in the proper collocation 
of words now critically verified (ὁ ἀδελφός after 
ἐπὶ τῇ σῃ yvacer).—the weak one,—the one 
who, of all others, ought to be treated with con- 
siderate forbearance, and from whom nothing 
should be exacted beyond his strength.—the 
brother,—a person bound to thee by the closest 
tie, and who ought to look to thee for assistance 
in the way of salvation, rather than for a stum- 
bling-block over which to fall and perish. [‘+The 
isolated and final position thus given to ‘the 
brother’ gives a pathetic close to the whole s2n- 
tence.” Srantey].—for whom Christ died. 
—And this is the most aggravating circumstance 
of all—‘thy conduct frustrates the purposes of 
Christ’s atoning death (comp. Rom. xiv.), since 
thou, in behalf of him, for whom this great sac- 
rifice was made, hast shown thyself unwilling to 
make the petty sacrifice of surrendering thine 
own right’ [(comp. Rom. xv. 1-3). There is a 
pathos and power in these words not to be over- 
looked. But mark the possibility implied—that 
persons, for whom Christ died, may perish. But 
whether they ever will or not, will be decided 
by each one according to the type of his theolo- 
gy]. The result of such conduct next follows.— 
In so sinning against the brethren.—He 
here passes over into plural, and gives them also 
to understand that he is now treating of no in- 
different matter. [The manner in which they 
had used their liberty, had rendered the other- 
wise allowable act positively sinful]. As expla- 
natory of this, he adds: —and wounding their 
weak consciences.—Tiatovrec, striking, 
and thereby painfully affecting, inasmuch as 
the conscience thereby is rendered evil and im- 
pure. [The word is used to exhibit more forci- 
bly the meanness of the conduct in question ; 
for what is meaner than to strike a thing that is 
weak]?—Ye sin against Christ.—Here is 
where the act culminates and exhibits its exceed- 
ing guiltiness. In what way this is done, is 
shown inthe previous clauses. It thwarts the 
ends of the Saviour’s death. It is true that 
Christ, as the head of the body, suffers also in 
the affliction of his members; but this is not the 
thought here brought out, (is not even indicated 
in the words: ‘the brethren”). ‘As in the 
main clause, the third item mentioned in ver. 11 
is again taken up, so are the first two, in the 
participial clauses.”’ OstanperR. This unloving 
use of liberty he shames to the very lowest, in 
expressing, as the result of these deliberations, 
his own purpose of self-denial.— Wherefore if 
meat make my brother to offend.—The 
verb σκανδαλίζειν, found in 2 Cor. xi. 29; Rom. 
xiv. 21, and frequently in the Gospels, means 
literally, fo cause a person to fall by laying a snare 
in his path; hence, to seduce or betray into sin, 
especially by bad example.—I will not eat 
flesh :—xpéa, the particular food of which he is 
speaking. —for ever;—eic¢ τὸν αἰῶνα : * while 
the world standeth’’—a strong hyperbole, in- 
tensifying the strong negative ov μή. ‘‘Here,in 
ver. 13 the ethical principle for regulating the 
use of things indifferent, is shown to be love.” 


176 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Neanver. [‘‘The whole argument closely re- 
sembles Rom xiv. 19-22, even to the particular 
phrases employed.” Stan.ey]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Knowledge and love are essentially identical. 
For all true knowledge implies, above all things, 
a going out from self, and all selfish aims and 
selfish isolation, and an entrance into something 
elsewin order to apprehend it, and to unite it 
with ourselves, and ourselves with it; and to 
assimilate it to ourselves while we assimilate 
ourselves to it, or, in other words, penetrate 
into its essential idea, give ourselves up to it, 
and then recast it, as it were, within ourselves. 
This is an act of the Spirit, in which all rigidity 
of mind is subdued, in which the individual de- 
scends from the isolated heights of his own se- 
parate individuality, surrenders or annihilates 
all mere self-serving; and at the same time con- 
fesses that he is not sufficient for himself, but 
stands in need of another, and only in connec- 
tion with that other can find true satisfaction 
and the fulfilment of his own destiny. Thus 
humility appears as an essential element of all 
true knowledge; and from this it follows, that 
where there is self-exaltation—where a person 
means to aggrandize himself by his knowledge, 
there true knowledge cannot exist. Aside from 
this also, experience teaches us that those, who 
have gone down into the profundities of know- 
ledge, are always truly humble; that with them, 
in presence of the greatness of the object studied 
(which, the more it is explored, exhibits the more 
its inexhaustible fulness and depth), their own 
individuality gradually dwindles and is lost from 
sight.—But it is precisely in this also that 
love consists. In its exercises, self passes out of 
its exclusiveness, and enters into some other ob- 
ject; and for the sake of this, it opens all its 
inner treasures in order to impart them—to have 
them no more for itself alone, but to enjoy them 
in fellowship with it. And this, in the sphere 
of personal life, by reason of the reciprocity and 
communion implied in love, is followed by a sup- 
plementary action, since the person beloved 
loves in turn, and requites his lover with all he 
has. In such self-renunciation, humility is an 
essential element; 1t implies a readiness to be 
abased—a willingness to live for others, for their 
service and the furtherance of their welfare. 
And this is so even with the more gifted as well 
as with those less endowed; as is seen in the 
simplicity with which the latter accept, and the 
former impart gifts; and also in the readiness 
with which the former refuse to avail themselves 
of their superior insight and larger liberty in 
the enjoyment of things morally indifferent, and 
in the assurance which the latter feel that the 
others may be acting rightly even where they, 
contemplating the matter from their position, do 
not feel at liberty to consent to the same, and to 
imitate them.—Such humble love includes a 
sound reciprocal knowledge; as, con the other 
hand, sound knowledge involves such love. But 
the root of both lies in the knowledge and love of 
God. The soul that opens itself Godward, that 
apprehends God’s truth—His living creative 
thoughts, is thereby made able and willing to 


search for the imprint of these thoughts in the 
rational as well as in material creation, to pass 
out of self into them, to become absorbed in 
them, and by appropriating them to become ii- 
self enlarged, or to fill with them all forms of 
existence that, by virtue of their resemblance to 
God, carry in themselves the types of creaturely 
life.—And this is an‘activity in which the indi- 
vidual can no longer remain egotistical, self-seek- 
ing and self-satisfied. But in carrying it out, he 
must renounce himself more and more, losing 
himself, as it were, in the depths of God and 
His creation, yet by this very means: becoming 
more truly great, and rich, and glorious.—But 
such an opening of the intelligence towards God 
is at the same time an opening of the loving 
heart towards Him, which carries with it an 
opening of the heart towards all creaturely life 
that is grounded in the life of God, and is loved 
and cherished by Him,—especially that personal 
life which bears God's image, and was formed 
for communion with Him; and, consequently, it 
implies a personal devotion to it for the sake of 
communicating some good to it in humility and 
self-denial.—But where there is such a love for 
God, there the person is known of God; and this 
involves a being loved by Him. And this is the 
primal source of all human knowing and loving. 
While God opens Himself lovingly toward the 
creature which He hath made out of sheer love 
—for an urgent desire to impart His own ful- 
ness to something needing it, He by this means 
draws it closely to Himself; and the more it 
follows this Divine attraction in hearty devotion, 
and thus loves God in return, the more is it re- 
cognized by Him as His—as belonging to Him by 
a voluntary determination, and taken up into 
the light of His Divine life, and illuminated by 
this light so that it becomes truly intelligent and 
knowing. 

[‘‘ For the connection of knowledge and love, 
see 1 Jno. iv. 7, 8: ‘Every one that loveth is 
born of God, and knoweth God; he that loveth 
not knoweth not God, for God is love.’—For 
the identification of God’s knowledge with His 
love, comp. Exod. xxxiii. 17; ‘ Thou hast found 
grace in my sight, and I know thee by name.” 
Also Jno. x. ὃ: ‘‘He calleth His own sheep by 
name.”’—For the identification of God’s know- 
ledge of man with man's knowledge of God, 
comp. the similar blending of the spirit of man 
with the Spirit of God in Rom. viii. 15, 16; 1 
Cor. ii. 11; also Jno. x. 15: ‘‘As the Father 
knoweth me so know I the Father.” —And then 
for the general turn of the whole expression, as 
implying that every part of our redemption, but 
especially our knowledge of God, is more pro- 
perly ΠΙΒ act than ours, see 1 Cor. xiii, 12: 
‘Then I shall know, even as also J am known;” 
Gal. iv. 9: ‘*Now having known God, or rather 
having been known by Him;” Phil. iii. 12: “IfT 
may apprehend that for which J am apprehended 
by Christ.” Sraniey]. 

2. Christian liberty, its nature and limitations. 
According to Luther’s spirited exposition in his 
tract entitled ‘*The freedom of a Christian,” a 
Christian through faith becomes free from all 
men, but through love is made the servant of all. 
This truth finds application also here as well as 
in chap. vii. 29 (see ‘Doctrinal and Ethical” in 


CHAP. VIII. 1-13. 


177 





Joco). In the consciousness of his fellowship 
with God the Father through Jesus Christ the 
believer knows himself to be exalted above all 
things. His Father is the one God who is the 
ground of all things and on whom all things de- 
pend; and the mediator of this new life in fel- 
lowship with God is the one Lord through whom 
are all things. In this their relation to God 
through Christ, then he ought to regard and 
use all things. However these may be regarded 
and used by others, to Aim they are nothing else 
than the works and gifts of God; through them, 
the Supporter of their being and existence be- 
comes the Supporter of his life in the family of 
God; to him are they furnished for free use and 
enjoyment, entirely apart from all other associa- 
tions which they may awaken in the conscious- 
ness of others. Thus to the Christian the flesh 
of those beasts, which have been offered to idols, 
is only the component part of a creature of God, 
the enjoyment of which is granted him by the 
Creator; and so far as he partakes of it with 
thanksgiving for the goodness therein shown, it 
is to him pure and harmless (comp. 1 Tim. iv. 
3).—But although free through faith, the believer 
is, on the other hand, bound through love, and 
comes into dependence on his brethren. If the 
use of the creature in question is a matter of in- 
difference as it respects his fellowship with 
God and his worth in God’s sight, while yet, on 
the other hand, in the view of his weaker breth- 
ren, who have not acquired that fulness of faith, 
and whose religious convictions on the point are 
still wavering, such conduct is questionable, by 
reason of its seeming contact with idolatry, and 
if they are not yet sufficiently independent to 
refrain from following the example of a person 
held in repute for superior discernment, then 
love demands that we pay regard to such cbharac- 
ters, and not set before them an example which 
will betray them into sin, nor do aught that will 
prove a stumbling-block in their path. To be 
reckless on this point and to enjoy our liberty 
regardless of how we defile the consciences of 
others, undermine their relation to God, and 
hazard their eternal salvation, is to evince an 
utter lack of love by reason of which not only is 
the weak brother injured, and fraternal obliga- 
tions violated, but also the Lord Jesus Christ 
Himself, who for the sake of this very brother 
offered up His own life, is aggrieved in the frus- 
tration of the ends for which His sacrifice was 
made. Hence it follows that the love of Christ— 
this love which embraces alike the weak and the 
strong and by faith becomes an indwelling and 
controlling power in the heart of every true 
Christian, must prompt the strong to condescend 
toward the weak, and to become as weak to the 
weak (ix. 22), and in their conduct relatively to 
them to seek to avoid whatever for themselves 
may be of indifferent character whenever there 
is reason to fear that the religious life of the 
weak may be endangered. 

[‘‘ This is a principle, however, the application 
of which must be left to every man’s conscience 
in the fear of God. No rule of conduct, founded 
, on expediency, can be enforced by church disci- 
pline. It was right in Paul to refuse to eat 
flesh for fear of causing others to offend; but he 
could not have been justly exposed to discipline 











had he seen fit to eat it. He circumcised Timo- 
thy and refused to circumcise Titus. Whenever 
a thing is right or wrong according to circum- 
stances, every man must have the right to judge 
of those circumstances.” Honan. The same 
holds good in regard to the drinking of wine, 
engaging in amusements, observance of the Sab- 
bath and the like]. 

3. [The intelligent conviction of right is essential 
to all right action. The demands of a sound mo- 
rality are not satisfied by the blind copying of 
another’s example, however highly the person 
may be esteemed. As beings endowed with 
moral discernment, and subjected to conscience, 
it becomes us to go farther, and endeavor to as- 
certain the fundamental principles which should 
rule in the conduct, and which make a thing 
right in itself, and right for us, and then govern 
ourselves by these. Itis to these principles— 
enthroned in the conscience, informing and en- 
lightening it—that our prime allegiance is due. 
The mature will can acknowledge no other so- 
vereignty without being false to itself, and los- 
ing its own integrity.—And still less can we go 
against the dictates of conscience in following 
some other assumed rule. The authority of con- 
science is paramount over all other, and its veto 
is a sufficient interdict upon all differing stand- 
ards of action. Eyen that which is right in it- 
self, becomes wrong for any individual when his 
conscience pronounces it wrong. Yea, para- 
doxical as it may seem, it must be affirmed that 
although it may sometimes be sinful for us to 
obey conscience—since it may sinfully enjoin 
wrong—it is always sinful for us to disobey it. 
Accordingly, when it prohibits wine-drinking, 
and theatre-going, and indulgence in games of 
chance, and the giving of sumptuous entertain- 
ments, and extravagance of attire and the like, 
then must these things be avoided, even though 
sanctioned by the practice of thousands of Chris- 
tians deemed reputable. But while it is our im- 
perative duty to obey conscience as it is, it is 
our business to do all we can to enlighten and 
instruct it in the truth. This private monitor, 
like the watch we carry for our constant con- 
venience, may be inwardly deranged, and go 
wrong; and, like that, it needs to be regulated 
by some absolute standard. And this standard 
is the Sun of righteousness, as it shines upon us 
through the Divine Word and Spirit. These, 
therefore, must be consulted more and more, 
until conscience be purified from all errors, and 
obedience to it become perfect righteousness] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


AuGusTINE:—VeER. 1. What art thou, O man, 
thou who art inflated with conceit! Let it suf- 
fice thee that thou art full (Eph. i. 23)! He 
who is full, is rich; who is puffed up, is empty. 

BrerRNHARD :—VER. 8. So much as thou lovest, 
so much thou knowest. 

SrarKE:—Venrs. 1-3 (Hed.). Pride corrupts 
all, even the best things. Knowledge is good; 
but with pride, poison; a bubble in its irides- 
cence is beautiful to look upon, yet full of wind. 
The knowledge even of divine things, not pos- 
sessed with humility, nor applied to right uses, 
is vanity in the sight of God.—Love must be the 


178 





queen of life; heart, of the understanding; aim, 
of the undertaking. Love is the infallible token 
of those in fayor with God.—Vv. 4—6. There is, 
indeed, only one God. But does not every sin- 
ner make to himself as many gods as there are 
creatures he loves, and so erect idols in his 
heart? Let each search and see (Col. iii. 5; 
Phil. iii. 19). O joy' many lords, yet only One; 
they have the title, but the One alone has the 
right and the might of lordship; and He is 
Christ unto whom it becomes us to live and to 
die (Rom. xiv. 8).—Ver. 7. Were Christians 
more clear and settled in divine knowledge, they 


would drop much which they consider right, and | 


do many things they now condemn as sinful.— 
As the smallest grain of sand causes to the eye 
great pain, so does the slightest deviation from 
God's law cause to the wakeful conscience great 
disquiet.—Ver. 8. Food belongs to the outer 
man; therefore, of itself can have no effect on 
our Christianity.—Vv 9,10. The strong in faith 
must take heed to his conduct for the sake of 
the weak, lest they ree and he»r of something 
which may cause them to stumble and perish 
(Matth. xviii. 6).—Vvy. 11-13, Even the weakest 
brother is of great account; since for him Christ 
died no less than for the strong; and those 
whom Christ honors are not to be lightly es- 
teemed. The contempt put on such falls on 
Christ (Matth. xviii. 10 ff.). All sins against 
our neighbor are also sins against God, who has 
commanded us to love our neighbor. And this 
statement holds good of all such acts which, 
though not in themselves sins, yet cause others 
to offend, such as associations, amusements, 
fashions, and the like. Who says, ‘Why should 
Icare? Let him be scandalized who will? God 
knows my heart, that I do not cling to these 
things,’ let such a person understand that he 
has neither repentance, nor faith, nor love in 
his heart. God knows that he clings not only te 
these things, but to the world, and the devil, 
too. What! Thou wilt not yield a hair, and 
carest not whether thy neighbor find life or 
death in thy domgs! 

Berven. Biste:—Vers. 1-3. A great outrage 


is committed when people say: We have clearer | 


knowledge; we have no scruples; we know the 
matter is of no consequence. A Christian must 
do nothing except on good grounds, and for this 
he himself must be grounded in love. Gospel 
knowledge consists not in vain, lifeless notions, 
which inflate the mind, but it is a quickening 
power [which, while it illumines, also sanctifies. 
Life is the light of men]. Knowledge alone in- 
toxicates; but love sobers. A sound knowledge 
is essential to Christianity; and this begins to 
show itself as soon as one loves the right. For 
88 soon as a person turns to God in penitence, 
God turns and shines on him. He who desires 
only to love, and for this will humble himself to 
the very ground, will be instructed of God. As 
he unites love with knowledge, God will accept 
him; and being approved by God in his know- 
ledge, he will then, for the first time, rightly 
know, viz., in the love and power of God; since 
he will then have the power of the Spirit in his 
own soul, and feel and possess the Spirit’s pre- 
sence and operations. Of this kind of knowledge, 
humanly taught scholastics know nothing. — 











THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Vy. 4-6. An idol does, indeed, exist only in the 
fancy of its worshippers, yet we ure not on this 
account to deal with it at random. Often are 
we obliged to be on our guard, even when we see 
nothing.—Is God verily to us the sole God? The 
faith which is held is not sufficient; there must 
also be a faith which holds. God must be tous the 
all in all. It is then we honor the Father as the 
father of all that bear the name of children; 
and who is also our Father; and to whom we 
shall again return suitably to the purpose of our 
creation. Christ has battled for us unto blood; 
hence, He has become anew our Lord, after the 
flesh. Apart from this, He was our Lord from 
all eternity.—Ver. 7. What is not done with as- 
surance of faith, is done lightly or wantonly.— 
Ver. 8. Boldness in eating [{. 6., in the mainte- 
nance of our liberty as to matters indifferent] is 
no indication of growth in Christianity.—Vy. 9- 
11. It does not follow that because an act is in 
itself allowable and harmless, it may be done 
without reflection. Nothing that does not accord 
with the rules of faith and love ought to be prac- 
tised. A freedman of the Lord does not seek 
his enjoyment in a lawless liberty.—Many ea- 
gerly long for, and quickly grasp at, liberty. 
But to be truly free, a person must be able and 
willing at times to give up his freedom. A love 
that is free looks not to its own advantage, but 
to the good of others; especially to those whose 
spiritual foundations are disturbed by the liber- 
ty they see taken by their fellows. That is a 
poor sort of edification—a building upon the 
sand, when a person blindly abandons himself 
to another’s guidance, and imitates him on the ὦ 
presumption that he is a wise man.—Take heed 
that thou provest not the means of destroying 
the smallest heartfelt obedience in the humblest 
Christian novice. Consider how near that per- 
son stands to thee for whom Christ died.—Vvy. 
12, 18. To look more to one’s self than to others 
to sin against those to whom we owe affection, 
to break the bruised reed—this is to sin against 
Christ—that Saviour who was ever moved to pity 
and uphold others.—It is a delicate thing to have 
to deal with a tender conscience. <A truly Aposto- 
lic spirit voluntarily makes himself the servant 
of all. Even when in the right, love makes us 
surrender our rights whenever and because the 
mind of Christ is in us. 

RizgER:—Vers. 1-7. To be known of God as 
His, and so to become assured of our knowledge, 
that it is exercised in the fear and love of God, 
this is the main thing. God is the origin of all 
knowledge. In this fact lies the foundation of 


j all humility; and the end and aim of all know- 


ledge [on earth] is the edification of our neigh- 
bor.—Through the light of the Gospel shining 
from the sole Godhead in heaven and upon earth, 
all false fears and all vain confidences are ban- 
ished; and we have only to keep our hearts col- 
lected in faith, and prayer, and worship, towards 
this one God, and towards our Lord Jesus 
Christ, and to maintain fellowship one with an- 
other. 

Hrvsner :—VeEn. 1-3. Knowledge is subject to 
a double danger, viz., that it be without love, and 
become an end in itself, and that it step beyond 
Scripture limits, and beget vain self-conceit and 
contempt toward others.—The conceit of supericr 


CHAP. VIII. 1--18. 


179 


OOOO OOOO Ὸ ΤΤὌἜ“΄ τΙΡ--ς--ῬΟῬῬ--------.---.-.--ς-ς - --ς-ςςς 


wisdom is a mark of folly; true wisdom humbles 
us, and teaches us how little we know, and brings 
us to recognize the right end and aim of know- 
ledge in the glory of God and inthe salvation of 
our neighbor.—The humble person, in whose 
heart love dwells, has the faculty for clear dis- 
cernment.—Vv. 4-6. There is only one God; 
but His worship is injured if we fasten our af- 
fection on vanities as if they were realities. 
Much, in itself innocent, becomes criminal by 
reason of the thoughts and intentions connected 
therewith. Even the creations of our fancy may 
become sin. The vanity of idol-worship should 
teach us the infinite worth of worshipping the 
true God, and the great merit of Christianity in 
that it eradicates this deeply-rooted and wide- 
spread superstition. The sum of Christianity, as 
distinguished from Heathenism and Judaism, is 
this, that the one God, the Creator, has revealed 
Himself as the Father through Jesus Christ.— 
Ver. 7. The lack of liberal insight is no sin, and 
can involve no disgrace: but to act against one’s 
own conscience, and to betray others into doing 
the like—this is sin. By this rule is every en- 
joyment to be judged. The question is not, 
‘What is it in itself?’ but, How does it appear 
to others? Hence, the injunction: spare weak 
consciences.—Ver. 8. Freely to allow all things, 
makes no one better; self-restraint, renuncia- 
tion, obligation, dishonors not. But the fear of 
appearing weak and pious—this is what makes 
truly weak.—Ver. 9. True strength and genuine 
freedom are best shown in being able to limit 
our freedom through love to God, and in behalf of 
others. The stronger, the tenderer, and the 
more sparing! If thy freedom betrays others, 
thou fallest thyself! Unfortunate knowledge, 
which occasions others the loss of a good con- 
_ science! Conscience is the holiest, the tenderest 
thing in man, and it suffers from the slightest 
touch. Also Christ’s heart is wounded, if we 
wound one of His believing ones. The enjoy- 
ment of our liberty at random, and the offence 
committed, stand in no comparison with each 
other. The former is vain, worthless, needless; 
the latter is corrupting and criminal. 
Besser:—Ver. 1. The first person puffed up 
was the devil. Allrefined opinions, which keep 
superstition far aloof, all correct views of God’s 
being and word, are empty as wind clouds which 
bring no rain, when they bring not forth the 


fruits of love.—Ver. 2. Not one single item of 
divine truth has attained to power in us as it 
should, if it does not divest us of our conceit and 
selfishness. —Ver. 4. In the world an idol is no- 
thing; for the world is God’s work, wherein 
nothing has being which man’s thoughts have 
created. But in the heart of man, ah! there the 
idols are, indeed, a frightful something, and “‘no 
joke,” as Luther says.—Ver. 8. Thanks be to 
Thy mercy, Ὁ God, that Thou furnishest to us in 
Thy Gospel the precious truth (Heb. xiii. 9), that 
that heart becomes established which is made so 
not by meats, but through grace.—Ver. 11. Not 
merely a conscious obstinacy in disobedience 
to God’s commands, but also a trifling readiness 
for any thing which stains the conscience, be- 
cause it is weak, is sufficient to destroy faith in 
the heart. So intimate and tender is the bond 
of fellowship between believing souls and Christ, 
that it is broken just so soon as any portion of 
our outward life is withdrawn from the control 
of the Spirit of grace.—Ver. 12. Not only do the 
strong and mature belong to Christ, but also the 
weak and novices no less.—Ver. 18. To yield 
to the arrogant, is to deny Christ; not to spare 
the weak is to sin against Christ. He who walks 
in love, avoids both. 

[Barnes:—Ver. 6. Christians, though truly 
conyerted, yet may have many erroneous views 
and feelings in regard to many things. The 
morning dawn is, at first, very obscure. And 
so it may be in conversion. This should lead us 
to charity, towards imperfections; to carefulness 
not to mislead; and to moderation in our expec- 
tations from young converts, especially those in 
heathen lands.—Ver. 1-9. Loveis a safer and 
more useful guide than knowledge.—Ver. 10, 11. 
Nothing is of more value than a correct Chris- 
tian example, particularly in those occupying 
the more elevated ranks in life. The ignorant 
look to them for guidance, and their conduct 
should be such as will conduct safely.—Ver. 13. 
A noble instance of Paul’s principles. If all 
Christians had Paul’s delicate sensibilities, and 
Paul’s strength of Christian virtue, and Paul’s 
willingness to deny himself, in order to benefit 
others, how soon would the aspect of the Chris- 
tian world change! How many practices now 
freely indulged in, would be abandoned! (Ad 
sensum) |. 


180 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





B. An Illustration of Self-denial drawn from the Apostle’s Life, in the Renunciation of his own Rights 
and Liberties for the Good of others. 


Cuapter IX. 1-23. 


1. Statement of his own rights as an Apostle. 
Vers. 1-14. 


Am I not an apostle? am I not free? [Am I not free?! am I not an apostle 77 
have I not seen Jesus Christ [om. Christ?] our Lord? are not ye my work in the 
Lord? If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal 
of mine’ apostleship are ye in the Lord. Mine answer to |them that do examine 

5 me is this: Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead 
about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, 
and Cephas? Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working % 
Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and 
eateth not of the fruit® thereof? or’ [om. or] who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of 
the milk of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the 
same also?® For it is written in the law of Moses,? Thou shalt not muzzle” the 
mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? Or 
saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, ¢his is [was] written : 
that [because] he that plougheth should plough in hope; and that [om. that] he that 
thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope" [in hope of partaking]. If we 
have sown unto you spiritual things, 7s 7¢ a great thing if we shall reap” your car- 
nal things? If others be partakers of this power over you,” are not we rather? 
Nevertheless we have not used [did not use] this power; but suffer all things, lest 
we should hinder the gospel of Christ. Do ye not know that they‘which minister 
about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait’* at the 
altar'are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they 
which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. 


- 


ΞΟ NOD H CO bo 


μι 


an ae ee 
m oo bn "Κα 


1 Ver, 1.—The precedence of this clause [thus reversing the order of the two as they stand in our version], is estab- 
lished by A. B. [Cod. Sin.], by almost all the -versions, and by other old authorities. [‘* Possibly the original order was 
changed to bring the weightiest question into prominence.” ALFORD]. 

2 Ver. 1.—The Rec. has Ἰσοῦν Χριστόν [with Ὁ. K. L.]; others have Χριστόν ᾿Ισοῦν. Χριστόν is an addition not found 
jn A. B. (Cod. Sin., and is omitted by Alford, Stanley]. 

3 Ver. 2.—Lachmann, Tischendorf*[{Alford, Stanley], have μου τῆς [to correspond with τὸ ἔργον μου] (instead of τῆς 
ἐμῆς); but it is not sufficiently attested. ‘ 

4 Ver. 8.---᾿Αὕτη éoriv; Lachmann | Alford, Stanley] read ἕστίν αὕτη, which also is not sufficiently attested. [Yet it ia 
found in A. B. Cod. Sin.}. 

5 Ver. 6. The omission of τοῦ is, indeed, strongly attested, but is to be explained as an attempt to conform with the 
foregoing clauses. 

6 Ver. 7.—Rec. has ἐκ τοῦ καρποῦ in conformity with what follows, but it is more feebly sustained. 

7 Ver. 7.—H is rejected by Lachmann according to weighty testimony; it was, perhaps, omitted to accord with the 
foregoing clauses. ; 

8 Ver. 8. The Rec. has ἣ οὐχὶ καὶ---ταῦτα λέγει [with K. L.]—feeble authority. A probable alteration of what seemed 
unintelligible. [The true reading: ἢ καὶ ὁ νόμος ταῦτα οὐ λέγει, is found in A. B. C. Ὁ, Cod. Sin.]. 

9 Ver. 9.—Griesbach reads: γέγραπται yap [omitting ἐν τῷ Μωυσέως νόμῳ], but without sufficient authority. 

10 Ver. 9.---κημώσεις [with A. B.2 C. D2 K. L. Cod. ag instead of with the Rec. and Lachmann [Stanley], read 
φιμώσεις. The former is best supported and more probable, because not found in the Sept. 

11 Ver. 10.—In the former of the last two clauses, the best supported order is: ὅτι ὀφείλει ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι ὁ ἀροτριῶν 
ἀροτριᾶν, instead of which the Rec. puts ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι before ὀφείλει, which is a variation of the order. In the second clause 
some of the better authorities have: τῆς ἐλπίδος αὐτοῦ μετέχειν. to which the Rec. appends the original ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι. The 
best accredited text is: ἐπ᾿ ἐλπίδι τοῦ μετέχειν [found in A. B. O. Cod. Sin.]. So Meyer [Alford, Stanley, and Words- 
worth]. 

12 Ver. 11.—The Rec. and Lachmann read θερίσομεν, [and so Alford, Stanley, and Wordsworth]. The subj. θερίσωμεν 
is strongly supported, and might have been crowded out by the future form, because grammatically objecti nable [A. B 
Cod. Sin. have the future}. 

18 Ver. 12.—ipav ἐξουσίας is far better accredited than the Rec. ἐξουσίας ὑμῶν [being found in A. B.C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.} 
But τινὰ ἐγκοπὴν is not so well authorized as ἐγκοπήν τινα. 

14 Ver. 13,—Ilapedpevortes is better supported than the Rec. προσεδρεύοντες. 


CHAP. IX. 1-14. 


181 


— ee eee ῦπτοοῸΟῸῸς--ς-τ-ς-ς-ς-ς-ς-.ς-ς-----.----------------Ὸ-----ς-ςς- 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 1-3. The fundamental principle and 
purpose of his, having been briefly stated in viii. 
13, he now proceeds to enlarge upon it, by show- 
ing how he had, in fact, been practising self- 
denial out of love to the Lord and his brethren, 
and how he had, in a far higher manner than 
he had demanded of them, renounced his own 
rights and prerogatives for the sake of winning 
souls and spreading the Gospel.—[‘‘ This whole 
passage, thus incidentally introduced, is one of 
the most elevated, heavenly, and beautiful dis- 
cussions in the New Testament, and contains 
one of the most ennobling descriptions of the 
virtue of self-denial, and of the principles which 
should actuate the Christian ministry, any 
where to be found. All classic writings, and 
all records of antiquity, would be searched in 
vain for an instance of such pure and elevated 
principle as is presented in this chapter.” 
Barnes ].—He begins with four questions [ab- 
ruptly introduced, which bring to view the po- 
sition from which he acted, and answer any 
objections they might be inclined to make 
against his appealing to his own conduct. “1 
would almost appear as if he had properly con- 
cluded the subject at viii. 13, and then returned 
to it from this new point of view on the arrival 
of fresh tidings from Corinth, informing him of 
the imputations which he now proceeds to dis- 
pel.” Stantey]. In the first question [see criti- 
cal notes |he asserts his independence,—a circum- 
stance which might appear to exempt him from 
the need of such circumspection as he above 
speaks of; jn the second,-his high function as 
an Apostle, which fully warranted this indepen- 
dence, and rendered him responsible to Christ 
alone, whose ambassador he was; in the third, 
the grounds of his Apostleship in respect of the 
Lord; and in the fourth, the seal of his office in 
the Corinthian Church itself, and in his labors 
there. He thus takes ground from which natu- 
rally to pass over and speak of his own right to 
support—a right, however, of which he had 
made no use out of regard to higher interests. 
[And this is the point in his example which he 
wished to enforce as a lesson upon his readers]. 
—Am I not free ?—1. ¢., independent, [not in 
a moral sense, as haying knowledge, and thus 
emancipated from foolish prejudices; but in a 
civil or legal sense, as at liberty to act as he 
chose, without being accountable to any man]. 
This point is resumed again in ver. 19; and the 
fact that it is not discussed until after the full 
statement of his Apostolic rights, might have oc- 
casioned the transposition of the two questions 
in the Rec. [‘‘The order here followed is not 
only that of the most ancient MSS., but is also 
in conformity with the sense. His freedom, 
and not his Apostleship, was uppermost in his 
thoughts, and was the special occasion of the 
digression.” Stantey.—But still more.—Am I 
not an Apostle ?—and so, placed even in a 
position of authority over others]? But, be- 
cause this fact was disputed by his opponents, 
he is disposed to linger here a little; and, by way 
of proof, asks still further,—Have I not seen 


the Lord ?—He here implies that his Apostle- | 








ship rested on the same foundation as that of the 
other Apostles, viz., the immediate call of Christ 
and the eye-witness of His glorified life. In this 
respect, therefore, he was their equal. The 
sight of Christ he speaks of refers primarily to 
that first manifestation of the Lord to him which 
effected his conversion (xv.3; Acts ix. 22-26); yet 
not exclusive of the later revelations mentioned 
in Acts xxii. 17, and xviii. 9, by which he was 
confirmed in his labors at Corinth. In no case 
are we to suppose any reference to his having 
seen Christ during his earthly life; this would 
have no significance whatever for the Apostle- 
ship of a Paul. That he says this with an eye 
to the Christ-party, as one that laid great stress 
on haying visions, so that this were an argumen- 
tum ad hominem, is a very doubtful assumption. 
In opposition to Riickert, who supposes that Paul 
here alludes to his ecstatic vision in the temple, 
NEANDER says: ‘‘It is impossible that such a 
vision should legitimate Apostleship.””—Are not 
ye my workin the Lord ?—The designa- 
tion, ‘‘in the Lord,” does not qualify merely 
‘“my work,” [qg. d., ‘ye are the Lord’s work, 
not mine’ (Chrys.) ], but it belongs to the whole 
question. They were his work as an Apostle, 
and were introduced by him into their new life, 
and constituted a Church of God, in the Lord, ¢. 
e., by virtue of his fellowship in the Lord. The 
phrase designates the element in which he 
wrought (comp. iii. 5 ff., and iv. 15). This 
thought he further expands.—If I be not an 
apostle to others.—By the others he means 
those coming into the church from abroad, it 
may be emissaries from Palestine who sought to 
mislead the Corinthians in regard to his Apos- 
tleship. *AAAoc is the Dative of judgment: ‘in 
their view or opinion.’ Οὐκ εἰωΐ expresses the 
fact as it was; hence, ov, not μή.----- αὐ, doubt- 
less, Iam to you.—The γέ strengthens ἀλλά: 
‘yet, at least,’ or ‘yet surely.’ More in full: 
‘Ye certainly cannot but acknowledge me as an 
Apostle; for ye yourselves, by the simple fact of 
your conversion, serve to confirm my claim.’ 
There is no allusion here to the miracles of the 
Apostle (Chrys.). These were wrought also by 
those not Apostles. But that his preaching pro- 
duced such results as could only be ascribed to 
the power of Christ, this was the proof of his 
assertion that he was Christ’s ambassador (comp. 
2 Cor. iii. 2).—for the seal of my apostle- 
ship are ye in the Lord.—X¢pcyic, seal, that 
wherewith one concludes, designates, and con- 
firms any thing; then, confirmation, witness, ori- 
ginal testimony. The words ‘‘in the Lord” 
belong here, also, to the whole clause, and im- 
ply that the fact asserted was of the Lord, inas- 
much as it was He that had vouchsafed to the 
Apostle so glorious a result in setting up a 
church so richly endowed in one of the chief 
seats of heathenism. [‘‘This, although valid 
evidence, and as such adduced by the Apostle, is 
very liable to be abused. First, because much 
which passes for evidence is spurious; and, 
secondly, because the evidence of success is 
often urged in behalf of the errors of preachers, 
when that success is due to the truth they 
preach; thirdly, because small real success may 
be taken as evidence for more than it will fairly 
warrant.” ‘Still, there are cases when the suc- 


182 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


S059 βἧβῥῤῤπΘὔΠὧΘπΠΡΠΡΡἂὃἂὃ 


cess is of such ἃ character, so undeniable and 
80 great, as to supersede the necessity of any 
other evidence of a divine call. Such was the 
case with the Apostles, with the reformers, and 
with many of our modern missionaries.” Hopae]. 
—'These suggestions he concludes with ver. 3.— 
This is my answer to them who examine 
me.—Here the words ἡ ἐμῇ ἀπολογία stand first 
by way of emphasis, just as αὕτη ἐστιν come last 
for the same reason. The phraseology is that 
of the courts,—a7odoyia, apology, defence, fol- 
lowed by the dative expressing the parties to 
whom it is made (2 Cor. xii. 19).—davaxpivevy, to 
judge, investigate, a8 magistrates at a trial, and 
here, for the purpose of opposition [‘*a direct 
allusion to his antagonists.” Sranney]. Αὕτη, 
thas, is the subject and not the predicate of the 
sentence (as in Jno. i. 19; xvii. 3), and relates 
to the fact expressed just before, viz., ‘‘the 
seal.” To connect this sentence with what fol- 
lows, [Chrys. and the E. V.], as introductory to 
it, is inconsistent with the contents there found; 
[ἴον what follows is no answer to those who 
called his Apostleship in question.” Hopeer]. 
Ver. 4-6. He comes now to the first point 
touched, viz., to his power, his civil rights which 
he had voluntarily renounced. The indisput- 
ableness of these he indicates by employing the 
form of a question—Have we not power to 
eat and drink ?—0vx« ἔχομεν, taken together, ex- 
presses one idea (comp. xi. 22, Rom, x. 18); [so 
that ““ μή asks the question, and οὐκ ἔχομεν is the 
thing in question; lit. 18. it so that we have not 
power?” Auroxp]. He here passes over into 
the plural, because he now takes into view his 
associates also, or because he desires to be re- 
garded, not in his ‘private capacity, but in that 
official position which he had in common with 
all the apostles and servants of God. [This, 
however, is doubted by Alford, who says that, 
“at all events, it will not apply to ver. 12, where 
the emphatic ἡμεῖς is personal.” ] In the matter 
of ‘eating or drinking,’ he has no reference to 
the Jewish laws respecting food [as though he 
were claiming exemption from them (as Billr. 
and Olsh.)], since this would be remote from the 
context; nor yet to the flesh offered in sacrifices 
(as Schrader) ; but, as is shown in what follows, 
to his right to live at the expense of the Church, 
a right which was grounded on his apostolic 
office. The same principle is applied to his 
journeying officially in company with a Christian 
wife ; for this is what he means when he says— 
Have we not power to lead about (with 
‘us)a sister wife? (ἀδελφὴν yvvaika),— 
The allusion here is not to a serving matron 
[ whose business it should be to minister out of her 
substance to the wants of the apostle as he went 
from place to place, according to the interpreta- 
tion of Aug., Jerome, and most of the early 
fathers, and as is still maintained by the Romish 
commentators in the interest of celibacy—an in- 
terpretation which very early gave rise to great 
abuses], for the subsequent reference to Peter 
forbids this (Matt. viii. 14), and it is inconsistent 
also with the qualifying term γυναῖκα (comp. 
Osiander). Nor is it the right of marriage 
which is here in debate, for this is simply pre- 
supposed. The point made is Paul’s right to 
have a companion in.travel at the cost of the 








Church, and for this he refers to the precedent 
set by the rest of the apostles,—as also the 
other Apostles, and the brethren of the 
Lord, and Cephas.—The allusion here is gene- 
ral, and we are not to conclude from it that all 
these parties were married. But does he here 
use the word ‘ Apostles’ in its broader or strict 
sense? Osiander infers the former from the 
mention made of the brethren of our Lord in a 
way which seems to assert for them a higher 
position. These did, indeed, occupy a very com- 
prehensive sphere of mission labor and impor- 
tant responsibility (as James, Gal. i. 19); but 
there is no reason to believe that they stood 
higher than the twelve. But who are these 
‘brethren of the Lord?” A prevailing dislike, 
existing even among evangelical churches, of re- 
garding the mother of our Lord, who was con- 
ceived in her by the power of the Holy Ghost, as 
the mother of other children also, born in lawful 
wedlock, has led to the supposition, either that 
they were only brothers in a broader sense, 
being the cousins of Jesus on the mother’s side 
(since such cases occurred among the Apostles, 
though never with this designation, see Luke vi, 
15 ff. and the parables in Matt. x. and Mark iii.), 
or that they were the sons of Joseph by an earlier 
marriage. ‘'The statement, ‘born of the Virgin 
Mary,’ is an article in the Church’s creed; but 
the question, whether she bore children after- 
wards involves no point of Christian faith.”— 
Burcer. Both the intimation given in Matt. 1, 
25, as also the repeated association of these 
brethren with Mary by the evangelists, which 
points to a closer relationship with her than that 
of step-sons (comp. Acts i. 14; Matt. xii. 46, 
xiii. 55), render it probable that they were, in a 
literal sense, the sons of Mary, who at first fol- 
lowed in the train of Jesus with their mother 
(Jno. ii. 12), and later became estranged from 
Him (Jno. ii. 8 ff.; comp. Mark iii. 21); but, 
finally, having rid themselves of their prejudices 
and unbelief by reason of His resurrection, en- 
tered the circle of His disciples (see Acts i. 14, 
where they are expressly distinguished from the 
twelve).* Among this number James stood pre- 
éminent. Him our Lord deemed worthy of a 
special manifestation of Himself after He was 
risen (1 Cor. xv. 7); and he was highly esteemed, 
and exercised great authority in the Church of 
Jewish converts (comp. Acts xy. 18; xxi. 18; 
Gal. i. 19; ii. 9; also see Osiander and Meyer). 
By referring to the authority of James (in which 
his brethren shared according to their measure), 
Paul here puts them next to the Apostles in order 
to establish his own apostolic rights upon the 
matter in question more firmly against the op- 
position of the Judaizers. Osiander’s inference, 
therefore, in regard to the “rest of the Apostles” 
is untenable. In further self-justification, he 
adduces more particularly the example of Peter— 
and Cephas—who occupied so high a position 
in the apostolic college (Neander) among the 
Jewish Christians. The assumption of a climax 
here, which makes Peter out to be the first of 








* (See this subject fully discussed in ANDREWS’ Life of our 
Lord, pp. 104-116; Neanner, Life of Christ, ὃ 22; Lanar’s 
Leben Jesu, ἢ xiii.; Kirro’s Ene., 2d Ed. Art. Jesus Christ, p. 
530; and Scnarr’s exegetical note in LANGE’s Commentary, 
Matt. xiii. 25,1. 


CHAP. IX. 1-14. 


183 








the Apostles (Cath.), is contradicted by ver. 6— 
Orlonly and Barnabas—Paul here associates 
with himself his early co-laborer, a man of high 
apostolic consideration (Acts iv. 386; xi. 22 ff; 
xiii. 14). | [‘* This is the only mention of him in 
conjunction with St. Paul since the date of the 
quarrel, in Acts xv. 39.” Sranuey. ‘It is not 
improbable that after his separation from our 
apostle he may have maintained the same self- 
denying practice of abstaining from receiving 
sustenance by those to whom he preached, which 
he had learned from Paul at the first.’”’ ALrorp. 
“Observe his humility of mind, and his soul 
. purified from all envy, how he takes care not to 
conceal him whom he knew to be a partaker 
with himself in this perfection.”” Curys.]— 
Have we not power to forbear working? 
—The power or right (ἐξουσία) which he here 
speaks of is not distinct from those above men- 
tioned, but is a consequence of the denial of 
them, apagogically introduced, g. d. ‘In that 
case, then, it would appear that Barnabas and I 
are not at liberty to forbear working.’ By 
‘working’ (ἐργάζεσϑαι) he means laboring for 
support (iv. 12; 2 Thess. iii. 8; Acts xviii. 5); 
hence the sense is: ‘are we alone under obliga- 
tion to work for our livelihood while we preach?’ 
The Vulgate, by omitting the μῆ, translates hoc 
operandi, 7. e., according to the Latin expositors, 
faciend: quod ceteri faciunt, according to Ambrose, 
‘of giving instruction for the sake of support at 
the cost of the churches’) ! 

Vers. 7-14. He next passes to establish the 
right claimed; and, first, from the analogy of 
secular laborers who are, -at the same time, 
striking illustrations of the nature of apostolic 
labor (iii. 6; 2 Tim. ii. 4). (1). The soldier.— 
Who ever goes to war? — Στρατεύεσϑαι, 
means, to march to the field, and is used alike of 
generals and soldiers, the same as in the active 
voice. Here it denotes the service of a private 
(Passow IL. 2, p. 1562).—at his own charges? 
--δίοις ὀψωνίοις, the Dative of ways and 
means; ὦ. €., 80 that he bears his own expenses. 
᾿Οψώνια, rations, cost, stipend (Luke iii. 14; Rom. 
vi. 23), [‘‘pr. ‘whatever is bought to be eaten 
with bread.’ Hired soldiers were at first paid 
purtly in rations of meat, grain, fruit.” Ros. 
Lex.]. ‘Paul here is arguing on the ground of 
natural right.” NeANpER.—(2). The husband- 
man.—who planteth a vineyard, and eats 
not its fruit.—T6v καρπόν, the accusative, 
instead of genitive after the εἐσϑέειν, to eat, is to 
be taken as the simple objective (Kiiunen, II., 
p- 181)]. (3). The shepherd.—who feeds a 
flock, and eats not of the milk of the 
flock.—’Ex τοῦ γάλακτος, of the milk [Juur, ἢ 
621, 3, i.]. The wages of the shepherd in the 
East is, even to this day, a portion of the milk. 

And this is partly converted into other articles 
of food, and also partly sold to obtain other 
commodities. Hence the case of the prep. ἐκ, 
with the gen. (Alford) ].—From the analogy of 
human relations and usages, he passes to Scrip- 
ture for proof, thus sustaining his position by 
& positive Divine ordinance. —Say I these 
things as a man ?—Kara ἄνϑρωπον, in a diffe- 
rent sense from that in iii. 8; here it stands in 
contrast with the Law of God, [and means, ac- 
cording to the modes of talking and acting preva- 








lent among men]. ‘‘Paul here puts an argument 
derived from human customs, and one taken from 
the Law over against each other.”” Neanprr.— 
Or does the Law, too, (kai) not speak 
these things? —x«ai introduces the higher 
instance as something additional. ”H, or stands 
apagogically as in ver. 6 (Meyer). g. d., ‘I 
would not appeal to human analogies had not the 
Law also spoken in the matter.’ On account of 
the cai, which would otherwise be superfluous, 
it were better to treat this as a question anti- 
thetic to the foregoing one, and specifying some- 
thing in advance ov (οὐχί) λέγει ταῦτα καὶ ἁ 
νόμος. But this would put ὁ νόμος first, as the 
object on which the emphasis lies, as the Rec., 
making a correct gloss here.. Λαλεῖν and λέγειν 
[the former used by the Apostle of himself, and 
the latter, of the Law] are to be distinguished as 
‘say’ and ‘speak,’ the latter having special re- 
ference to the contents (comp. Rom. iii. 19), 
(Meyer). [““Δαλεῖν expresses the general idea 
of talking, whether reasonably or otherwise,— 
λέγειν implies speaking in a rational, intelligent 
manner.” Ἢ. Wesster, Syn. of the Gr. Test. 
This discriminating use of terms, is an incidental 
evidence not only of Paul’s accuracy of language, 
but also of his delicate humility].—The legal 
statute referred to is introduced with yap.—For 
in the Law of Moses it is written, Thou 
shalt not muzzle an ox which treads out 
the corn.—This law is found in Deut. xxy. 4. 
The same allusion occurs in 1 Tim. v. 18, [‘‘from 
which passage the reading φιμώσεις probably 
came.” ALForD].—Is it for oxen that God 
is concerned? or does he say this alto- 
gether (πάντως) on our account ?—The 
most direct and natural reason of this com- 
mand, viz., kindness to brutes, is here left out 
of view by the Apostle, since he disavows for 
the great Lawgiver (God) a special care for 
oxen in this provision, and applies it, not as an 
inference from the less to the greater, or by way 
of accommodation, but directly to teachers, as to 
persons engaged in a higher kind ‘of service, viz., 
the preparation of spiritual nutriment for the 
people (not, as Philo does, to men in general, as 
creatures endowed with reason). This interpre- 
tation of the Law rests on the correct presump- 
tion that the Law has a typical character, and 
that its enactments provide for higher relations, . 
of which those specified are but the shadow (Col. 
ii. 17). In the rapid reasoning of the Apostle 
the intermediate thoughts are not brought out; 
but the higher intent of the words is directly ex- 
hibited, to the entire omission of the more ob- 
vious one, which here seems to be denied, as 
though God did not care for oxen. The attempt 
to modify the language by supplying the word 
‘only,’ is arbitrary. ‘‘We are not to press this 
language too far. Taken literally, it would ap- 
pear as if Paul denied a general providence in 
contradiction to what our Lord says. All he 
intends here is to obtain from the particular 
Mosaic statute a more general ethical principle, 
applicable to the relations existing between 
man and man; and in doing this he does not 
separate between the interpretation and the 
application.” NreanpER. And so Meyer says: 
«This class of creatures were not the object of 
the Divine solicitude in this statute; that which 


184 


THE FIRST EPISTLE ΤῸ THE CORINTHIANS. 





expresses care for oxen was said not for their 
sakes, but on our account.” [‘‘Every duty of 
humanity has for its ultimate ground, not the 
mere welfare of the animal concerned, but its 
welfare in that system of which MAN is the head, 
and therefore man’s welfare. The good done to 
man’s immortal spirit by acts of humanity and 
justice, infinitely outweighs the mere physical 
comfort of a brute which perishes.” ALForD]. 
—Presupposing an assent to the second question, 
he proceeds to argue in its favor by explaining 
the statute in its higher sense.—For on our 
account was it written.—[The γάρ, for, gives 
the reason for the assertion implied in the pre- 
vious question].—that,—dr:, is neither to be 
rendered ‘because’ [as, Alford, Hodge, Stanley], 
since what follows cannot possibly be construed 
as a possible reason; neither is it intended to 
introduce a supposed quotation [as Riickert, 
who finds here the language of the Apocrypha]; 
but it is merely explicative, as pointing to the 
practical result.—he that plougheth should 
plough in hope, and he that threshes, in 
the hope of partaking.—[See Critical notes]. 
The designations ‘plougher’ and ‘sower,’ are 
not to be taken literally, as denoting either the 
oxen themselves, or the persons who engage in 
husbandry, since we are now in the higher range 
of thought; but they are to be interpreted spi- 
ritually, as exhibiting typically the labors of 
Christian teachers in accordance with the lan- 
guage of the statute and under the forms of 
agriculture. The emphasis here lies on the 
words ‘“‘in hope,” [which accordingly in the Gr. 
come first]. The obligation to plough rests on 
hope, viz., the hope of enjoying the products of 
the field (comp. 2 Tim. ii. 6). And so in the 
matter of threshing. [The language here is 
elliptical]. As in the first clause we must sup- 
ply to the word ‘hope’? what is mentioned in 
the second, viz., ‘‘of partaking ;”’ so in the se- 
cond we must supply the verb ‘to thresh,’ or 
‘should thresh,’ as suggested by the first. 
From ignoring this, persons have been betrayed 
Into attempts at alteration, as is shown in the 
various readings in different MSS. (comp. Osian- 
der). The meaning is: ‘that the teacher is 
bound to his office in hope of enjoying its com- 
pensations’ (Meyer); or, to express it more ge- 
nerally: the obligation to laborious efforts in 
our calling as laborers in the field of God (iii. 
9), rests upon the hope, etc.—In ver. 11 he ap- 
plies what has been said to the particular rela- 
tion which he and his fellow-laborers sustained 
to the Corinthian Church in respect of their 
rights.—If we sowed unto you spiritual 
things, is it a great thing if we shall reap 
your carnal things ?—A like antithesis occurs 
in Rom. xv. 27. There is no reason for including 
Barnabas under the strongly prominent ἡμεῖς, we, 
since nothing is known of his labors in Corinth. 
We may say with Meyer, ‘‘that Paul, though 
speaking categorically, means in fact himself 
alone. The corresponding collocation in ἡμεῖς ὑμῖν 
---ἡμεῖς buGv—we to you—we yours, is emphatic. 
But the justification of his claim appears all the 
stronger, from: the fact that the recompense to 
which the laborers are entitled, involves some- 
thing far inferior to the blessings they have con- 
ferred. ‘Spiritual things’ are the blessings 








which proceed from the Holy Spirit, the doctrines 
of revelation through which the germs of a 
Divine life are implanted in the heart which un- 
fold themselves in knowledge, faith, love and 
hope; ‘‘carnal things” are such as belong to 
the lower natural life. In the figures of ‘sow- ~ 
ing’ and ‘reaping,’ it is implied that the obtain- 
ing of the lower good is a natural sequence upon 
the bestowment of the higher, even as the harvest 
follows upon seed-time. The question: ‘‘is ita 
great thing?” points, however, to the dispropor- 
tion which exists between the one and the other, 
g. d., ‘It is a very small thing.’—The subj. 
(ϑερίσωμεν) after εἴ, occurs commonly both in the 
more ancient Greek (Homer and the lyric poets), 
and in the later impure style. According to 
Osiander, it denotes something midway between 
definiteness and indefiniteness; a definite asser- 
tion of the right, with an indefiniteness in regard 
to its application. 

Having thus established his claim to recom- 
pense on the ground of having imparted to them 
an incomparably higher good, he proceeds to set. 
forth his case in still stronger light by compar- 
ing himself in this respect with other teachers 
who, with far less cause, still used their right to 
support.—If others.—The allusion here is not 
to false teachers precisely, (as in 2 Cor. xi. 12- 
20), since he is treating of a veritable right ; but 
only to those whose title to their help stood far 
below his (ydAAov).—be partakers of this 
power over γου.---Ἕτῆς ὑμῶν éefovciac)— 
Ὑμῶν is the objective genitive asin Matt. x. 1; 
Jno. xvii. 2, power of you, for power over you, 
viz: in reference to the reaping of carnal things, 
ver. 1l.—are not we rather.—The ellipsis is 
easily filled up from the preceding clause.—After 
this strong assertion and maintenance of his right, 
he states what his course had actually been, and 
the reason of his conduct.—nevertheless we 
did not use this power,—[not because he 
dared not, as some might suppose, and thus in- 
fer a consciousness on his part of lacking apos- 
tolical authority].—but we bear all things. 
---οΣτέγειν, as also in xiii. 7, and 1 Thess. iii. 1, 
lit. to cover, to protect, so that nothing shall pene- 
trate, [used of vessels containing and holding 
without breaking], hence, to hold off, to hold out, 
to forbear, to endure in silence. (Passow 11. 2. 6. 
p. 1526,)—in order that we may not pre- 
sent any hinderance,—éyxorj, a cutting into 
the path, hence, impediment, hinderance. This 
would arise from charges of covetousness and 
self-seeking inthe work ofthe ministry, which his 
independence of them would obviate.—to the 
Gospel of Christ,—[a prominent statement of 
that whose claim overrides every other, and in 
behalf of which it is fitting that one should do, 
and endure all things ].—After this preliminary 
statement of how he had renounced his own 
rights, he adds yet another proof of his title, 
taken from the analogy presented by the Jewish 
priesthood. Observe, not heathen priests, for 
there would be no fitness in appealing to the 
usages of those in support of his position, since 
they were not divinely instituted. And to the 
usages of the Levitical priesthood he refers, as 
to a matter already familiar to his readers.—Do 
ye not know, that those performing the 
things of the temple.—'Ovra ἱερὰ éipyas- 


CHAP. IX. 15-23. 





ὄμενοι, 80 the priests are first designated.— 
This may imply the care and ministration of 
offerings, as ἱερόν often occurs in this sense 
among classic writers; or the performance of 
temple services in general. The latter is to be 
preferred, because the second designation points 
definitely to the duties at the altar.—live of 
the temple,—éoviovowv, lit. eat, ὦ. e., obtain 
support from the temple, from the tithes, first- 
fruits, shew-bread, and other gifts brought hither 
' Comp. the speech of the Zealots in Jos. B. J. 

. Xili. 6, del τούς TH ναῷ στρατευομένους ἕκ τοῦ 
vaov τρέφεσϑαι,᾽" STANLEY ].—those waiting at 
the altar.—rapedpetew comp. vil. 35. The re- 
ference of the first of these designations in this 
verse to the Levites and the second to the priests, 
is untenable. Both relate to the latter alone, 
and these omv are analogous in their office to 
the Christian teachers. —share with the altar. 
Συμμερίζονται indicates that they received a por- 
tion of the sacrifices, and so partook with the 
altar of what was offered.—even so,—points to 
ver. 13. (Pareus on the contrary: ‘In consis- 
tency with all that has hitherto been said”’).—the 
Lord—. e., Christ, whose language in Matth. x. 
10; and Luke x. 7 the Apostle has in mind. 
‘« Here we meet with a citation from the sayings 
of our Lord, which affords fresh proof that Paul 
must have already had a collection of our Lord’s 
discourses.” NEanDER.—also,—xai, in addition 
to the precepts of the old covenant to which this 


2. Testimony to his own self-denial 


VERS. 


15 





185 





of our Lord’s corresponds. Were ὁ κύριος-ε:ῦ 
ϑεός it would have read: καὶ toic—xatayyéAovow 
ὁ κύριος διέταξε (Meyer).—commanded those 
preaching the Gospel.—[‘‘It was a com- 
mand to ministers themselves not to seek their 
support from secular occupations, but,—to live 
of the Gospel,—as the priests lived of the tem- 
ple. This law of Christ is obligatory on minis- 
ters and people; on the latter to give, and onthe 
former to seek a support from the church, and 
not for worldly avocations. There are circum- 
stances, as the case of Paul shows, under which 
this command ceased to be binding upon preach- 
ers. These are exceptions, to be justified, each 
on its own merits ; the rule, as a rule, remains 
in force.’—Hopar. To defraud ministers of 
their due is to rob God. — Worpswortu Ί].---ζῇν 
ἐκ. i. e., the Gospel should be to them the means 
of support :—[‘‘ Observe, that here the Apostle 
is establishing an analogy between the rights of 
the sacrificing priests of the law, and of the preach- 
ers of the Gospel. Had those preachers been like- 
wise themselves sacrificing priests, is it possible that 
all allusion to them in such a character should 
have been here omitted? But as all such allu- 
sion is here omitted, we may fairly infer 
that no such character of the Christian min. 
ister was then known, As Bengel remarks on 
ver. 138:—‘‘If the mass were a sacrifice Paul 
would certainly have shaped to it the conclusion 
in the following verse.’’—ALFORD. ]. 


in relation to his rights and powers. 


15-23. 


But I have [om. have] used! none of these things: neither have I written these 


things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that 


For though I preach the gos- 


For if I do this thing willingly, [of my own accord] 


[obligatorily] a dispensation [stewardship] 
Verily that, when 


For though I be free from all men, yet 
And unto the Jews 


16 any man should make my [cause for] glorying void.? 
pel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, [for*] woe is unto 
17 me, if I preach not the gospel [3 
I have a reward; but if against my will, 
18 of the Gospel is committed unto me. What is my® reward then? 
I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ® without charge, that I abuse not 
19 [use not to the full] my power in the Gospel. 
20 have I made myself servant unto all, that 1 might gain the more. 
I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as 
under the law, [zns. although I myself am not under the law]’ that I might gain them 
21 that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not 


without law to God,’ but under the law to Christ*), that I might gain* them that are 
22 without law. To the weak became I as [om. 8.55] weak, that I might gain the weak: 


23 I am made all things” to all men, that I might by all means save some. 


And this 


[all things] I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you. 


1 Ver. 15.---Οὐ κέχρ. οὐδενί [found in A. B. C. D1 F. Cod. Sin.] is better sustained than οὐδενὶ κερ. and the Rec. οὐδενί 


εχρησαμην. 
2 Ver. 16.—Tischendorf reads : 


ἵνα τις κενώσει; the Rec. κενώδῃ feebly supported. Others simply τις κενώσει. Tho 


original is undoubtedly οὐδεὶς κενώσει, of which τις κενώσει and the Rec. text are emendations. [Kling understanding an 
aposiopesis after 7, renders the passage thus: ‘‘It is better for me to die than—my glorying no man shall make void 7, 
In “‘ Exegetical and Critical,” also Meyer, [also Stanley's note]. 


186 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 


eer 





~- 


3 Ver. 16.—Tép is far better supported thar the δέ of the Rec. [which Alford calls “ἃ clumsy alteration,” not seeing 
that γάρ explains ἀνάγκη. The γάρ is found in A. B. C. Ὁ. F. Cod. an 

4 Ver. 10.---Εὐαγγελίσωμαι is more credited than ζωμαι (Rec.), or ζομαι (Lachmann). [It is found in A. B. C. Ὁ. F.], 

6 Ver. 18.—Mov; Rec., Lachmann, ΓΒΙΒΠΙΕΣῚ μοι, tolerably well authorized, but by some put after ἐστιν. 

6 Ver. 18.—The addition, τοῦ χριστοῦ, found in the Rec., is opposed by the best authorities, [being omitted by A. B.C 
D.1 Cod. Sin., and by all good editions]. ; 

7 Ver. 20.—The clause μὴ ὧν αὐτὸς ὑπὸ νόμου, omitted in the Rec. [probably by oversight of the copyist ”’], is to be ace 
cepted according to the most decisive authorities |A.B. C. Ὁ. Ε΄ Cod. Sin.]. δ δὰ 

8 Ver, 21.—The Rec. has θεῷ, χριστῷ κερδήσω. Instead of which θεοῦ, χριστοῦ (genitives of dependence) and κερδάνο 
are better authorized. In κερδήσω we have a conformity with ver. 20. ἃ 

9 Ver. 22.—The Rec. has ὡς ἀσθενής, according to many, but not preponderating authorities. It was introduced ir 


conformity with the preceding ones. 
10 Ver, 22.—The Rec has ta before πάντα, contrary to all the best authorities. 

11 Ver. 23.—The τοῦτο of the Rec. is very feebly supported. Meyer calls it: “amore accurately defining gloss.” [A. 

B.C. D. F. Cod. Sin. all read πάντα]. 
posite case. He would then translate: ‘ Better 
for me to die,’ ἡ, 6., ‘rather than suffer myself to 
Be er et eG be supported, I will prefer to die; or, fi the 
Vers. 15-18. After again reminding his read- | other hand, if such a thing need not occur, my 
ers that he had not made use of his rights, so | boasting none shall make void.’ But this under- 
clearly established, he goes on to protest, in the | standing of the passage appears so forced, that 
most positive manner, against the suspicion that | we are still disposed to prefer the aposiopesis. 
he designed to avail himself of these arguments | [Alford adopts the reading iva τίς κενώσει, and 
in the future.—But I used none of these | translates: ‘than that any one should make 
things—i. 6., not the proofs adduced (Chrys.), | void my (matter of) boasting.’ Wordsworth the 
but (comp. ver. 12) the right itself in its several | same, with the exception of κενώσῃ for κενώσει. 
particulars (vy. 4-5). -And I wrote not these | Stanley puts a colon after μου. and makes ὀυδεὶς 
things in order that it might be so done, | κενώσει, a separate clause, rendering the whole 
—i.e., as I have written, or ‘‘after the examples | thus: ‘It were better for me to die than my 

I have alleged,”—in me,—ép ἐμοί, asin Matth. | boasting: no one shall make it void.’ ]. 

xvii. 12, in my case, and this he confirms with In ver. 16, ff. he assigns the reason for putting 
great emphasis.—for good were it for me,— | so great a stress on discharging his office gratu- 
καλόν, suitable, reputable, honorable.—rather to | itously.—For if I preach the Gospel there 
die.—There is no need of interpreting ἀποῦϑα- is forme no matter of boasting.—Katyyya 
ν εἰν to mean death by hunger [as Chrys., Estius, | ver. 6, (materies gloriandi). He means, the mere 
Billr]. In what follows, the text is much dis- | proclamation of the Gospel was not, in and of 
puted. If, with Lachmann (who, instead of #, | itself, anything in which he could boast, in con- 
supposes v7, comp. xv. 31), and with Meyer, we | trast with his opponents. His advantage lay in 
read οὐδεὶς κενώσει. (according to B. D.* [Cod. | renouncing his right and preaching without re- 
Sin.], then there is no need of punctuating, as| compense. To interpret εὐαγγελίζομαι to 
Lachmann, pov oidec; but it were better to as- | mean: ‘if I take a reward for preaching,’ is, at 
sume, with Meyer (2d ed.), an aposiopesis,* so | all events, contrary to the New Testament usage, 
that after 7 we are to supply something like | and inconsistent with the use of the word in the 
χρῆσϑαι τῇ ἐξουσία ταύτῃ, or μισϑὸν λαμβάνειν | context.—Why the mere fact of preaching was 
(which it was incompatible with his feelings to | no ground of boasting he goes on to explain. It 
express). Then upon this a new independent | was a duty imposed on him, from which he could 
sentence would follow. The whole would then | not escape.— For a necessity is laid upon 
be rendered thus: Good were it for me ra- | me.—[It was a moral necessity, put upon him 
ther to die than (to use this my right, or to | by the call and commission of Jesus, and by the 
receive my reward); my cause for boasting | immeasurable obligations he was under to His 
no one shall make νοϊᾶ--καύχημα, mat- | pardoning grace]; and how imperative thisneces- 
ter for glorying, not the act of glorying itself; | sity was he shows by pointing tothe effects which 
and this, as appears from the context, was the| his refusal to submit to it would draw down | 
preaching of the Gospel without compensation. | upon him.—For woe is unto me ifI should 
‘‘Paul can here mean only a glorying in the pre- | not preach the Gospel.—Ova, properly an 
sence of men.” Burarr.—From a failure to per- | interj. ishere to be taken substantially, and ἐστίν 
ceive the aposiopesis above asserted there have | to be supplied. It refers to the Divine judgments 
arisen various attempts at amending the text. | which would fall on him if he ventured to diso- 
Because οὐδείς did not suit, τὰς has been adopted | bey the heavenly call. Hence the fearful nature 
(by others ric), to which a iva still appeared re- | of the necessity, originating primarily in the 
quisite, making it read: ‘than that any one, efc. ;’ | Divine will, demanding a punctilious obedience, 
and finally the fut. ind. has been changed into | and also the impossibility of any boast in fulfil- 
the aor. subj. This is the received text. In/lingit. In this ““ necessity’ Neander thinks he 
behalf of οὐδεὶς we have the authority of [Cod. | discovers something which distinguishes Paul 
Sin. and] A., which read οὐδεὶς μή. But if the | from the other Apostles. The others had joined 
aposiopesis is not allowed, then we must decide | themselves to Christ of their own accord; while 
for reading of B. iva τις xevéoer: ‘than that any | he had been, as it were, constrained to enter the 
one shall make void.’ Meyer, in Ed. 8. regards | service. Accordingly, we discern in this word 
the aposiopesis too bold, and takes ἢ as—or, on | the sense which Paul had of the overwhelming 
the other hand, in the sense of, otherwise, in the op- | urgency of his calling.—This last statement 
See idk nates ata ene = —*— | (and so also the preceding ones, whether the first 
gure of speech, in which the speaker breaks off | oy the second, but these not primarily) he illus- 


suddenly, as if unwilling or unable to state what was in his 2 ἢ 
mind”’}. | trates and confirms by a denial of the opposite. 








CHAP. IX. 15-23. 





—For if I do this voluntarily, 7. ¢., on my 
own motion, of my own accord, without haying 
been obliged thereto—I have a reward,—i. 6., 
from God,—but if involuntarily [7. 6., obliga- 
torily, having been called to it by another, whom 
I could not disobey],—with a stewardship 
have I been entrusted,—my position is that 
of a steward, who, when he has done all that he 
could, has no more than discharged his obliga- 
tions, and so has no title toa reward, (comp. 
Luke xvii. 10). The first of the above cases, he 
means ta say, does not suit his case [‘‘a hypo- 
thetical statement,’’ de Wette says]; since he 
was constrained to preach by the obligations put 
on him by a higher will; hence he wasin the 
condition of a steward, who was absolutely de- 
pendent on the will of his master, and who, while 
expecting no reward for the faithful discharge 
of duties, might yet look for punishment in case 
he failed. [Stewards, it must be remembered, 
were usually selected from among the slaves of 
the establishment, as was Eleazar by Abraham, 
and Joseph by Potiphar]. This interpretation 
of Meyer, and in part that of Osiander [adopted 
also by Hodge, Alford, de Wette] fully satisfies 
the words and the context.* To translate the 
words ἐκών and ἄκων, willingly and unwillingly 
would hardly suit, if we are to understand 
the last clause as describing Paul’s case, since 
we can in no wise predicate reluctance or un- 
willingness of him in the discharge of his 
ministry.—But if we unite εἰ de ἄκων οἰκ. πεπί- 
orevua: in one clause, rendering it: ‘but if I am 
unwillingly entrusted with the stewardship,’ 
then the word ‘ stewardship’ loses its significance 
for the argument; and it would be the same if 
we put: “1 amentrusted with a stewardship,’ in 
a parenthesis ; and to supply the ellipsis of, “if 
unwillingly” with the words, ‘I do this” isin any 
case simpler than to make an apodosis by the addi- 
tion of ‘I haye no reward.’ But to take the words 
following as the apodosis would be inadmissible 
on account of the οὖ v, then.—The meaning would 
be entirely changed if overleaping the two 
clauses: ‘woe is me, efc.,’ and: ‘a necessity is 
laid upon me,’ we find here the confirmation or 
explanation of the beginning of ver. 16, so that 
the idea of gratuitousness (gratis) is involved in 
ἐκών, and that of the opposite in ἄκων, and in the 
phrase: ‘I have a reward,’ we understand him 
to speak of his ‘matter of boasting.’ [Billroth, 
Bloomfield]. The ἐκών would then indicate that 





* (Calvin. Wordsworth, Stanley, however, adhere to the 
strict meaning of ἑκών and ἄκων as given in the E V., viz; 
‘willingly’ and ‘ unwillingly.’ They apparently regard the 
γάρ, not as confirming what immediately precedes, but as 
resuming the generalargument. ‘ For if I preach the Gos- 
pel willingly,—which indeed I do, notwithstanding the ob- 
ligation imposed upon me, as my unremunerated labor 
shows, and for the sake of showing which I renounced my 
claims,—I have a reward, 7. e., from God, though not from 
you;butifIdo it unwillingly, and simply because I am 
compelled to, why then I reduce myself to the condition of 
a domestic servant who merely acts as he is bidden.’ This 
interpretation makes Paul intent on showing that he had 
made that which was a matter of bounden obligation his 
high privilege, and was fulfilling it in such a manner as to 
have praise from God. Hero was the reason why he would 
never seek support from the church. One advantace of this 
view is, that in making the first of the hypotheses state 
Paul’s case, we naturally connect the expectation of a re- 
ward here expressed with tne inquiry which he goes on to 
answer, “ What then is ny reward?” On it our author goes 
on to comment]. 








187 





he was manséing the thing as his own affair, and 

was omitting nothing which would serve to fur- 

ther it, and produce results happy and honorable 

for himself, in which ‘he would have his re- 

ward;’ but ἄκων would mean that he was dis- 

charging his direct obligations, only so far as 

to escape the penalty of neglect, and so was act- 

ing as a steward, 7. 6., aslave charged with the 

domestic economy, so that all reward or boasting: 
would be out of the question. But in such an 
interpretation there would be 1, a foisting into. 
the words ἐκών and ἄκων as well as into οἶκον. πε-- 
πίστευμαι of something foreign to them; and 2, 

he would, in what follows, be designating that as. 
his reward, which, a little before, appears to be- 
the ground of his having a reward. 

After having substituted the term ‘ reward’ for- 
that of ‘boasting,’ in ver. 17, he retains the ex- 
pression, and referring back to ver. 15 (τὸ καύ-- 
χημά wov,* he asks—what then is my re- 
ward ?—To take this question as implying a 
negative answer (Meyer) in immediate connec-- 
tion with what precedes—as though the mean- 
ing were: ‘since 1 ama steward, not acting at 
my option, no reward can avail me, in order that 
(in accordance with the end appointed by God) 
I may preach unsupported’ (which, as lying be- 
yond my obligation now really merits a reward) 
—is, on the one hand, somewhat forced, and, on 
the other, leads to that which Dr. Baur (7ub., 
Theol., Jahrb.) objects to Meyer’s interpretation, 
that it involves the germ of the doctrine of su- 
pererogation, in entire contradiction with Paul’s 
whole mode of thought, since if Paul regarded 
the gratuitous proclamation of the Gospel as con- 
ducive to its success, he must have recognized 
such a course as obligatory upon him. As Bur- 
ger says: ‘not according to the rights belong- 
ing to him, but in accordance with his estimate 
of his own personal relation to his high office 
(xv. 8, 9; Eph. iii. 8; 1 Tim. i. 15, 16), did 
Paul consider himself bound to do what was not 
incumbent on the other apostles, and in order 
that he might demonstrate through his whole life 
the earnestness and depth of his cratitupE for 
the salvation so undeservedly conferred on him, 
and the office entrusted to his charge.—[If, how- 
ever, weregard the first of the two previous clauses 
as expressing Paul’s case—that in declining sup- 
port he was showing how freely he accepted the 
obligation, he was thus rising above the condi- 
tion of a steward, who was merely discharging his 
office from necessity, and so was having some oc- 
casion for boasting—some reason to look for a 
reward, we must here regard Paul as proceeding 
to state what reward he was looking for]. The 
answer to this question [is variously found; it 
either] lies in the following words, beginning 
with ἵνα εὐαγγελιζόμενος [and which may be ren- 
dered as in the E. V. ], That when I preach 
I shall make the Gospel without charge. 
—This was to him remuneration enough, that 
the Gospel which he proclaimed should prove no 
burden to the Church, [that he could enjoy the 
satisfaction of offering salvation without money 


| and without price to all whom he addressed]. 


The ἵνα would then introduce the object had in 
view: “Wherein then does my reward consist ? 





*(But why not to what just precedes: ‘I have a reward ? 
This were the more natural]. 


188 





Why, in this, that I make, etc.” This the origi- 
nal signification of ἵνα is preserved. Wow, fut. 
indic., which elsewhere accompanies iva (yet 
oftener ὅπως) when some continuous act is spoken 
of. [Or we may, with Alford, consider these 
words as simply continuing the question and 
stating the circumstances in which he is looking 
for his reward.—What then ismy reward, 
that I while preaching shall render the 
Gospel without charge ?—‘‘iva, like ὅπως in 
classical Greek, with a fut. indic. points to the 
actual realization of the purpose with more pre- 
cision than when followed by the subjunctive. 
The question in other words would be: ‘* What 
reward have Lin prospect that induces me to preach 
gratuitously?” The answer tothe question would 
in this case be found in the next verse. ].—unto 
the’ end that, (εἰς +é).—This may denote 
either the design in view (‘in order that’), or 
the simple result (‘so that I shall not, etc.’),— 
Either would consist with the use of language.— 
I shall not use my power. — Καταχρῆσϑαι 
[not as in the E. V, abuse, for this would yield no 
fit sense here], but as in vii. 81, to use to the 
full.—in the Gospel,—i. 6., in proclaiming the 
Gospel; [or, still better, ‘‘ conferred upon me by 
preaching the Gospel.”—Sranuey]. | 

Vers. 19-23. For being free from all, I 
enslaved myself to all.—The ‘for”’ indi- 
cates a connection between this and the previous 
words: ‘‘that I may not use my power.” This 
connection may be understood, either as imply- 
ing only a remote relation between the expres- 
sions ‘‘power” and ‘‘free,” and introducing 
proof of that self-denial, which prompted him to 
renounce his right, as shown in other respects 
(so de Wette; in like manner, OstanpeER: “ With 
an easy transition from the matter of his self- 
denial hitherto discussed, he passes rapidly on 
to show how he had exhibited the same in an- 
other and indeed the highest degree”’); or, ina 
stricter manner, as though by the expression 
‘my power,” he designated his Apostolic pre- 
rogative in general, and the ‘‘freedom”’ he here 
speaks of were included under it (ver. 4); (so 
Meyer). At all events the connection is mode- 
rated by the thought that it was, with him, a 
fundamental principle, to make no use of his 
right,—only to give and not to take; and so also 
to devote himself to others instead of subjecting 
them to himself or making himself dependent on 
them, rather than make them dependent on him. 
[Stanley gives yet another view: ‘In the first 
instance, the idea of enslavement to all is sug- 
gested by the servile labor he had undertaken, 
as distinct from the free independence which he 
might have enjoyed as an Apostle; but he ra- 
pidly passes from this to his accommodation to 
the various feelings of all his converts, in the 
hope that of this mass he might gain the greater 
part to the cause of Christ. For the same tran- 
‘sition from the idea of servile labor to that of 
serving generally, comp. Phil. ii. 7 (dofdov.).” 
Alford here finds the answer to the question: 
What is my reward? ‘For (q.d., the reward 
must have been great and glorious in prospect) 
being free from,” ecc.]. 

This principle of his he exhibits more fully in 
connection with the purpose he had in view, 
wherein at the same time his matter of boasting 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








(καύχημα) in this respect may be seen. First, 
he mentions in general, how, for the sake of a 
higher object, he surrendered his independence, 
since, though as Christ’s Apostle, he was depen- 
dent on no man, he had made himself dependent 
on all, had accommodated himself to their cus- 
toms and prejudices, and in the plenitude of his 
Apostolic power, had, for their sakes, descended 
to the low condition of a slave.—that I might 
gain, κερ δήσω is explained by the concluding 
σώσω (ver. 22). It means a winning for Christ 
or for God’s kingdom by conversion (comp. 1 
Pet. iii. 1; Matth. xviii. 15). This was ever 
deemed by Paul a ‘reward,’ a ‘cause for boast- 
ing’ [1 Thess. ii. 19, 20], although the word in 
this context is not to be referred precisely to this 
thought. [Bengel, on the contrary, finely says: 
“ἐ κερδήσω, L may gain, this word well suits with 
the consideration of @ reward.” But Anrorp 
adds: ‘This is not enough; it is actually the 
answer to the question: ‘* What is my reward?” 
and it is for this reason that ive—xepdjou, is 
three times repeated|.—the greater number.— 
τοὺς πλείονας, as in x. 5, the larger portion of this 
company (not: ‘the more’ [as in the E. V.]; 
nor: ‘as many as possible ;’ not yet, because of 
the τούς, with OusH.: ‘those ordained unto salva- 
tion by God’). [ALrorp says: ‘the largest 
number of any: that hereafter Paul’s converts 
might be found to be οἱ πλείονες, the more nu- 
merous.” This certainly accords with the am- 
bition of Paul].—The following details point in 
part to diversities conditioned upon the ante- 
Christian position of the parties mentioned 
(Jews, Heathen, ver. 20 ff.), and in part to 
weaknesses existing in the pale of the Church, 
that required consideration (ver. 22), wherein 
he more nearly approaches his main theme. 
But because the same purpose is expressed here 
also as in what precedes, this, too, must be re- 
ferred to the ante-Christian state, but not to the 
exclusion, however, of all allusion to that spoken 
of in the whole paragraph.—and I became to 
the Jews as a Jew, in order that I'might 
gain Jews.—To interpret τοῖς Ιουδαίοις 
to mean Jewish converts, and the subsequent 
designation: ‘those under the law,’ of the 
stricter Pharisaic class among them, is inconsis- 
tent with the object in view, viz., that he might 
gain them, for such were already in a measure 
gained; and also with the contrast in ver. 21. 
[Examples of how he became a Jew may be 
found in Acts xvi. 8; xxi. 26].—to those 
under the law.—This is only another desig- 
nation for Jews, describing them according to 
their peculiar characteristic (Rom. vi. 14; Gal. 
iii. 18; iv. 21); and it denotes neither Jews of 
the stricter Pharisaic class, nor proselytes of 
righteousness, nor Samaritans, nor Sadducees, 
who only held to the Pentateuch.—as under 
the law.—The word as denotes only a confor- 
mity in respect to customs, modes of life, and 
methods of instruction. That he preserved his 
independence in circumstances where Judaism 
was insisted upon as the condition of salvation, 
is evident from Gal. ii. 3 ff. Besides he asserts 
the maintenance of his own personal freedom 
from the law in the following participial clause 
not parenthetical [which does not appear in the 
Rec. ].—not being myself under the law.— 


CHAP. IX. 15-28. 


μὴ ὧν αὐτός, etc. Here wf denies the thing as a 
matter of consciousness, [it being the subjective 
negative]. That he hereby intended to repel 
a charge of capricious self-exemption from the 
law to which he was properly bound, is a doubt- 
ful assumption.—to those without law.—By 
these are not meant proselytes of the gate, as 
persons who were bound by the law only in 
part; nor yet such parties as would no more 
submit themselves to the law’s control; but 
heathen, properly speaking (comp. Rom. ii. 12- 
14), and so designated in contrast with the 
Jews, since they were not bound by the Mosaic 
law, and in which respect he conformed to them. 
—as without law,—in so far as he cast off 
Jewish ordinances in his intercourse with them 
(comp. Acts xi. 3, 7), and presented the truth to 
them, not in Jewish, but in Hellenic forms of in- 
struction (comp. Acts xvii. 28; [1 Cor. viii. 1-7; 
ix. 24-27]). [‘‘The word by which he here de- 
scribes himself (ἄνομος) is the expression used to 
designate him in the forged Epistle of Peter to 
James (ch. ii.) in the Clementines; and seems, 
therefore, to have been a well-known term of 
reproach against him among the Judaizers.” 
Srantey]. For the purpose [therefore] of 
guarding against all mis-application of the term, 
as well as under the impulses of pious feeling 

being ‘‘ unwilling to appear, even for a moment, 
independent of God”’], he repels all thought of 
any heathenish lawlessness (ἀνομία) being here 
intended, and asserts that, so far as this law had 
been revealed in its perfection through Christ, 
he both lived and moved in it.—being not 
without law to God, but under the law 
to Christ.—"Evvopocg χριστοῦ. comp. 
νόμος χριστοῦ, Gal. vi. 2; Jno. xiii. 834.—Jeod and 
χριστοῦ are genitives of relation and dependence 
(‘* Without legal dependence on God, legally de- 
pendent on Christ.”” Meyer). To be ‘under 
law to Christ,” is different from being ‘‘under 
the law,” inasmuch as the consciousness of ob- 
ligation in one who has become justified in Christ 
in order to walk worthy of Christ, and to imitate 
Him in doing the will of God is different from 
servitude to the law.as the means of justification 
before God (comp. Rom. x. 5; Gal. iii. 10ff.). 
[Here again the subjective nature of the asser- 
tion as indicuted by μῇ, instead of οὐκ, must be 
noted. ‘ Being conscious of not being,—remem- 
bering well in the midst of my ‘lawlessness’ 
(ανομία) that I was not.” Atrorp. ‘ Paulus 
non fuit anomus, nedum antinomus.”’ BENGEL].— 
to the weak.—Under this term he includes 
those previously mentioned (vy. 20, 21), persons 
who, lacking the higher power of Christ’s spirit, 
require considerate treatment—when Jews, a 
mode of intercourse suiting with their law; 
when heathen, a freedom from the law. [So 
Stanley. But Alford, on the contrary: ‘The 
aoSeveic here can hardly be the weak Christians 
of ch. viii. and Rom. xiv., who were already won, 
but those who had not strength to believe and receive 
the Gospel” (Rom. vy. 6). To this Hodge well 
replies; ‘‘The word κερδήσω means merely, to win 
over, to bring to proper views, and therefore may 
be used in reference to weak and superstitious 
believers as well as of unconverted Jews and 
Gentiles.” ]—I became weak,—. ¢., I entered 
into their condition in one way and another. 


189 





ὶ 
This condescension to their peculiarities was, in 
appearance, a weakness; but, in truth, it was 
indicative of the highest moral power. If, with 
de Wette, we understand by the term ‘‘ weak,” a 
lack of ability to apprehend the higher moral 
truths, then the expression, “1 became weak,” 
would denote an accommodation on Paul’s part 
in the methods of his instruction of them; but 
this has little in its favor.—Summing up all he 
concludes—To all—(i. ¢., ‘‘to those just men- 
tioned.” Os1anpER; ‘‘to the generality of men 
with whom I had to do.” Mryrr).—I became 
all things.—‘‘Omnibus omnia factus est compas- 
sione misericordiz, non simulatione fallacix, non 
mentientis astu, sed compatientis affectu.”” AUGUS- 
TINE. It was an all-sided adaptation of himself 
to others,—within the limits of truth, of course, 
and in those things which were morally indiffe- 
rent, according to the rule and direction of a 
love that was intent upon the salvation of souls. 
[‘‘There are two things to be carefully observed 
in all cases of concession to the opinions and 
practices of others: first, that the point con- 
ceded be a matter of indifference; for Paul never 
yielded in the smallest measure to any thing that 
was in itself wrong. In this his conduct was 
directly the opposite to that of those who accom- 
modate themselves to the sins of men, or to the 
superstitious observances of false religions. And 
secondly, that the concession does not involve 
any adinission that what is in fact indifferent, is 
a matter of moral obligation. Paul's conduct in 
relation to Timothy and Titus shows the princi- 
ple on which he acted. The former he circum- 
cised because it was regarded as a concession. 
The latter he refused to circumcise, because it was 
demanded as a matter of necessity.”” Hope ].— 
in order that by all means I might save 
some.—[zdvtwe, omnino, or as Meyer, in all 
ways. Stanley says: ‘by all means, with the 
double meaning as in English” ].—and all 
things I do.—vrdvra δὲ ποιῶ, [see Critical 
notes]. The ‘‘all things” do not refer exclu- 
sively to what have just been spoken of,—as 
would be the case with the feebly supported 
reading τοῦτο, this—although these are not to be 
excluded. The meaning is: ‘all things which I 
do, I do,’ ete. [‘*St. Paul did not become totally 
and at once, but severally and singly, not abso- 
lutely, but respectively, all things to all men.” 
WorpswortuH ].—The object of this—on ac- 
count of the Gospel.—(d:a@ τὸ evayyé- 
Acov). It is a question whether we have here 
an independent thought, or whether it is only a 


‘more general expression for that which is stated 


more fully in the following objective clause,— 
that I may be a fellow partaker of it 
(with you).—In the latter case, συγκοίνωνός is 
either taken—to further, i. e., an active partici- 
pation in the work of spreading the Gospel (which, 
however, does not accord with usage, and would 
only be a repetition of what has just been said, 
while by the connective dé a progress of thought 
is indicated); or as denoting a participation in 
the salvation offered by the Gospel—a thought 
hinted at in the previous clause. in the former 
case διὰ τό evayy., must be construed as express- 
ing the object aimed at in spreading the Gospel: 
“in behalf of the Gospel, for its honor and 
glory ;” but interpreted as expressing the further 


190 





aim of ‘his doing all things on account of the 
Gospel,’ the clause ἴνα---γένωμαι, must be taken in 
the sense of becoming a fellow-participant in the 
salvation of the Gospel. But here again we have 
the exceptionable repetition (in dca τὸ ebayy.) ; 
hence the assumption of an epexegesis, with the 
above correct rendering of ovyxow., deserves 
the preference. The meaning then is, that all 
he did aim at was to become a partaker with 
them in the salvation of the Gospel. At the same 
time, the objective end of that concerning which 
he had just spoken, is not excluded; but he only 
brings out now the other side, in order to let 
them see in his own example how his solicitude 
for his own salvation in fellowship with others, 
is something which must lie very near the heart 
of the Christian in all he does; and that this, in 
all his varied activity, is not a matter to be pre- 
sumed upon, but must be striven for with the 
utmost earnestness.—In this thought we find the 
point of transition to the subsequent exposition, 
in which by pointing to his own example he 
presses on the Corinthians the importance of 
greater solicitude for their own salvation, and of 
sparing no pains or sacrifeces in the attainment 
of this end (ver. 24ff.). [‘* Here a new thought 
is introduced. Up to this point he has been 
speaking of his self-denial for the sake of others; 
here he begins to speak of it as for his own sake. 
It is no longer ‘that I may save some,’ but ‘that I 
may be partaker of the Gospel with you.’ ‘Do 
not think that I do not require fhis for myself. 
In order to do good we must be good. To extend 
our Christian liberty to the utmost verge, is dan- 
gerous not only for others, but for ourselves 
also.’ This argument he proceeds to support 
first from his own example and secondly by the 
warning of Israelitish history.” Sraniey]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The Ministry—its claims and its obligations. 
The regular and professional ministration of 
God’s Word, requiring the expenditure of time 
and strength, in providing stated spiritual nu- 
triment for a congregation and in the cure of 
souls; and in qualifying himself for which a per- 
son has spent his property either entirely or in 
part, founds a claim to the support both of him- 
self and his family, in a manner suited to the 
position he occupies, This is an ordinance of 
the Lord himself, who has said: ‘‘ The laborer 
is worthy of his hire.” It is a rule, moreover, 
which reaches down to the lowest grades of ani- 
mal labor performed for man, and runs through 
all departments of human society, and must be 
binding in proportion as the work done is ex- 
cellent. It must, therefore, be most of all in 
force in that sphere where the relation of that 
which is given to that which is received is that 
of the ““ spiritual” to the ‘ carnal.” 

On the other hand, it becomes a workman on 
this holy soil to show himself, in accordance with 
our Lord’s example, to be one to whom “Ὁ it is 
more blessed to give than to receive :᾿ so that 
he shall not only discharge his more general ob- 
ligations, the neglect of which would subject 
him to rebuke—not only perform what he is paid 
for, but shall also be ready to offer all manner 
of aid at the cost of time and strength, even 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
eee 


in cases where no legal obligation binds him sq 
as in this respect to fulfil the Scripture: « Freely 
ye have received, freely give.” He must appear, 
not as one dealing in temporal affairs, looking 
ever for his equivalents, but as one carrying in 
himself a large liberal spirit, free from ambition 
and avarice, and all forms of selfishness. By 
his whole attitude and conduct, by word and 
deed, he must let it be seen what a joy it is to 
take that which has freely flowed in upon him, 
especially that which a partial love has con- 
ferred, and let it flow out again in all manner of 
gracious bestowments, relieving the afflicted, the 
sick and the needy, and helping on the work of 
the Gospel, both at home and abroad, promoting 
the enlightenment and the salvation of mankind 
at large, of every kind and degree, both within 
the limits of Christendom and in the regions 
beyond. 

2. Accommodation in the Ministry. Self-deny- 
ing love is exercised, not only in the renuncia- 
tion of one’s own rights to support, and in un- 
rewarded toils and sacrifices for others’ welfare, 
but also in condescending from the heights of 
superior knowledge and liberty to enter into the 
narrownesses and weaknesses of others, to ac- 
commodate oneself to their spiritual defects and 
necessities, to freely conform to their ways so 
as to infuse in them confidence as towards one 
of their own kind, to speak with them in their 
own language—with children in a childlike man- 
ner, and with adults according to their several 
powers of apprehension, and so to become all 
things to all men. And this will be done so 
genially that those with whom we converse 
shall not feel it to be a condescension. On the 
contrary, our whole speech and deportment will 
seem natural, through the blending power of a 
sympathizing love. Thus will love fit itself to 
every variety of forms and customs and habits, 
and to all spheres of life,, doing whatever may 
be requisite for kindly intercourse, and avoiding 
or removing whatever hinders it, and holding it- 
self ever ready to enter into all hearts, and win 
them towards the highest good.—And all this will 
be done for Christ’s sake, and in accordance with 
the example of Him who, out of His own Divine 
love, entered into human nature, stooping to its 
lowest bent of infirmities, in order to redeem 
sinners, and lift them up toa lifeinGod. 

But as in Christ there is truth, and nothing 
but truth, so must thisconformity be kept within 
the limits of truth. As in Him there was no 
self-seeking, no selfish fear of men, or vain de- 
sire to please men, so will it be with a proper 
accommodation. It will be_unwarped by such 
faults. That were a false, immoral compliance, 
to adapt oneself to the ways of others, especially 
their religious rites and customs, either for the 
sake of avoiding persecutions, or of courting 
favor, or of gaining coveted emoluments and ap- 
plause, just as did the Jesuits in their mission- 
ary labors, as many Christians have done in 
their intercourse with the heathen, and as Eyan- 
gelicals did towards the Romanists during the In- 
terim. It is also an exceptionable accommoda- 
tion when a preacher or teacher, for the sake of 
maintaining his position, or of obtaining one 
with a view to subsistence, comes down from the 
height of his lofty views and clear conceptions, 





CHAP. IX. 15-23. 


191 





to profess his faith in, and inculcate opinions 
which are objectionable and degrading, because 
untrue and superstitious. Equally unworthy 
and immoral is it also to gesticulate or speak as 
a worshipper in presence of, or in company with 
others who believe in a personal God, who can 
be approached in prayer, although one is a 
stranger to that faith, and considers such prac- 
tices as follies, belonging to a lower grade of 
conceptions ; and the more reprehensible is such 
conduct in proportion as the motives which 
prompt to it are low and selfish, (comp. Heub- 
ner). 

ἢ The doctrine of supererogation. The Ro- 
mish divines, as is well known, adduce the 16th 
verse in support of their doctrine, which teaches 
the special meritoriousness of works, which, 
under the promptings of love, exceed the scope 
of the command enjoined. The reward which 
Paul here looked for, according to the ‘‘ annota- 
tions in the Rhemish version,” was the ‘‘reward 
of supererogation, which is given to them, that 
out of aboundant charitie do more in the ser- 
vice of God than they be commanded, as St. 
Augustine expoundeth it.” The fallacy here 
consists in making specific precepts, which are 
mainly relative and prudential, the absolute rule 
of duty. Determined by the highest and most 
universal law, every good that it is possible for 
man to do, isa matter of obligation. ‘He that 
knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it 
is sin.” ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God 
with all thy heart,” ete. If Paul therefore knew 
that by renouncing his right to support he would 
avoid the appearance of selfishness, remove a 
stumbling-block in the way of the Gospel, and 
strengthen his influence, he was bound to re- 
nounce his right; and in so doing he obtained 
only the reward which belongs to all works done 
in love—the reward of grace. His self-denial 
was a work of supererogation only in relation 
to man, but not in relation to God. See Catvin 
Inst. B. 111. ch. 14, ὁ 14 ff; B. IV. ch. 18, 3 12 
1]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


[In this chapter we have a self-drawn portrait 
of the great Apostle—a portrait which vividly 
represents to us the man, not only through the 
particular features described, but also in the 
free, courageous style in which the sketch is 
made. The object in thus bringing himself to 
view is to enforce the precepts contained in the 
previous chapter by his own example, and to 
prove his right to teach as he did, by his own 
practice. Accordingly we observe here: l. 
Paul’s position a. as a man—‘‘free,” bound by 
no legal obligations to any, and capable of taking 
care of himself; ὁ. as an office-bearer—‘‘an 
Apostle,” holding the very highest authority in 
the church, as proved by his having seen the 
Lord, and having had the seal of the Spirit put 
to his ministry (vv. 1, 2); ¢. in his rights, first 
to domestic solaces (ver. 5), and secondly to 
maintenance, as proved, a. in accordance with 
the princip]> of compensation for work (ver. 7), 
B. by the law of Moses (vv. 8, 9), y. by the ana- 
logy of the “evitical priesthood (ver. 13), δ. by 
the commande of Christ (ver. 14). 2. His con- 





duct, a. abnegation of legal claims to support 
(vv. 12, 14); ὁ. endurance of privations and toil 
(ver. 12); 6. condescension even to the position 
of a servant (ver. 19); d. kind accommodation 
to the weaknesses and prejudices of others. 3. 
His purpose. He designed to continue this 
course of self-denial at all cost, and rather die 
than abandon it (ver. 15). 4. His motive—the 
desire of the reward which belongs to the work- 
man who counts duty a privilege, and exceeds 
the limits of legal obligation in the excess of his 
love (ver. 18), and which comes from gaining 
the larger number of souls to Christ (ver. 19), 
and which is found in the more certain enjoy- 
ment of the Gospel, in fellowship with those for 
whom he labored (ver. 23). 

The traits which here shine conspicuous are: 
consciousness of perfect integrity; a sense of 
personal dignity as a man and an Apostle; frank- 
ness; courage ; love in its highest forms of self- 
sacrifice, condescension and zeal ; and wise pru- 
dence in the methods chosen for gaining the 
highest ends. 

In all this we have: 1. an instructive picture 
of a true minister of Jesus Christ; 2. an illus- 
tration of the power obtained for the enforce- 
ment of precept by appealing to one’s own ex- 
ample; 8. an exhibition of the might and ma- 
jesty which resides in a self-denying spirit]. 

StarKe.—Ver. 1.—Faithful ministers find 
their best support in their calling and office, in 
their good conscience and Christian walk; and 
their best apology in their deeds and not in their 
words.—Ver. 2: There are bad preachers who 
are praised, and good preachers who are blamed ; 
look at the fruits: if these are good then the 
tree is good also.—Ver. 7: Avarice and ingrati- 
tude are alike great sins,—the former in minis- 
ters, if they labor only as hirelings for a re- 
ward; and the latter in the people if they let 
their ministers suffer.—A three-fold illustration 
of a right-minded minister (ver. 7): the first 
(that of a warrior) tells of valor and unshaken 
courage in overturning the kingdom of darkness 
by the right use of spiritual weapons (ver. 25; 2 
Cor. x. 4, 5) ; the second (that of a vintner) tells 
of unwearied labor ; the third, (that of a shep- 
herd) tells of constraining love and official fidel- 
ity (Ez. xxxiv.; Jno. x.).—Ver. 11:—The bless- 
ings conferred through the ministry are more 
precious than can be adequately requited by 
temporal good. Ye hearers, be rich in love; ye 
ministers, rich in contentment (1 Tim. vi. 18; 
Phil. iv. 11);—ver. 13 ff: A faithful worker is 
worthy of his reward; but lazy, reluctant, lux- 
urious ministers deserve not the good they en- 
joy.—ver. 16: Preachers must preach; and 
hearers hear. There is no escape from this. 
On these things hang life and death.—ver. 17: 
It is the sure sign of a faithful minister that he 
discharges his office with such yearnings of affec- 
tion toward Christ and toward his hearers, as 
admit neither of indifference, nor idleness, nor re- 
luctance (1 Pet. v. 2; 1 Thess. ii. 8).—Fidelity 
in office is no special merit (Luke xvii. 10); yet 
a faithful servant may look for a reward of grace 
from Christ (Matth. xxv. 23).— Not ministers 
only, but all Christians equally should endeavor 
to remove whatever obstructs the cause of Christ. 
—Ver. 19: The servants of Christ, while exer- 


192 


* THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a i a TE ET LTT js saGsp) > Sca oC 


cising Christian love and kindness, and gentle- 
ness towards all, must, at the same time, take 
care to preserve a good conscience, and in no 
way prejudice their abiding in Christ.—Let 
those who rule consider themselves as the ser- 
vants of all (Mark x. 43); and so in matters in- 
different let them overlook, yield and suffer 
much, in order to win those under them, and 
promote their improvement. This is the method 
of true love.—ver. 20: A blessed sort of men- 
pleasing, when it is without sin, unto edifica- 
tion! (Rom. xv. 2).—ver. 21: Those who asso- 
ciate with the godless for their good, must be 
careful to abide by the law of Christ; otherwise 
they will deteriorate rather than improve.—ver. 
23: A minister who does not labor himself to be- 
come a partaker of the Gospel will never pro- 
perly labor to make others partake of it. 

BERLENBURGER Bisie.—Ver. 10: We must not 
abide by the shell of Scripture; but break into 
the kernel. The shell reads ‘‘oxen;’’ but the 
inner sense means us, patient, laborious minis- 
ters, who plough the field of the church, labor 
in the fear of God, take firm steps in the Divine 
ways, and spare not but trample on the flesh, in 
order that the hidden kernel of the spirit may 
burst the hull, and move men to repentance and 
the mortification of their earthly affections. 
And such should be enabled to enjoy the fruits 
of their spiritual labor in the tokens of grati- 
tude.—Ver. 11: It is the part of a true minister 
to be unwearied in laying in the heart a good 
foundation, and planting good seeds therein for 
an after abundant harvest.—Ver. 12: To ab- 
stain from one’s right is ἃ proper offering.—Ver. 
13: Men eat at God’s table. He feeds His ser- 
vants when He gives them of that which belongs 
to Him.—Ver. 16: The must here is not a slay- 
ish, but an evangelival must: the love of Christ 
constrains.—Ver. 19. In Christianity freedom 
and service stand together. Where the former 
is not, there there is not in the heart such a wil- 
lingness to engage in service. This is true 
Christian magnanimity—to be free from all, and 
yet to devote one’s self to all. He who has not the 
love so to devote himself is certainly not free, but 
acts under constraint.—Ver. 20 ff: Genuine con- 
descension goes counter to flesh and blood ; since 
it is only through a Divine love that a person 
can be induced to endure, to wrestle, to fight, 
to turn and twist like a worm in order to accom- 
modate himself to the circumstances and whims 
of poor ignorant souls, and to surrender, wil- 
lingly yield, or share in any thing innocent, for 
the sake of winning them to Christ the better. 
A minister must bring with him into his office a 
large pity, since he will be obliged to see much 
want, and not be able to shape everything on 
one last. It costs something to associate with 
the weak and distressed, and the like, whose so- 
ciety men are apt to shun. The mind and ex- 
ample of Christ are to us sufficient law ; by these 
our minds are taken captive and sufficiently as- 
sured.—Ver. 23: He who labors much to impart 
the Gospel obtains im return a proportionate 
share of its blessings. The peace of God which 
he dispenses will return upon him. 








Rieger [is omitted, being substantially a re. 
petition of the above]. 

Hrospner.—Ver. 1: The work which alone 
endures is that which is performed on the hu- 
man heart, and a faithful minister has the best 
opportunity for erecting a monument which — 
shall outlast human records.—Ver. 3: Every 
person is bound to vindicate his conduct to his 
friends.—Ver. 7: There may be claims to a re- 
ward without the undue coveting of a reward.— 
Unthankfulness towards ministers merits earnest 
rebuke.—Ver. 8 ff: A man should wait for his 
reward in hope, not demand it before his work 
is done.—Ver. 11: Manual labor, and the ex- 
penditure of time, may be appraised, but not the 
nobler toil, the superabundant blessing, and 
faithful heart of a true minister. These God 
alone can reward with His love.—Ver. 12: It is 
precisely the most faithful minister that has to 
encounter human wickedness in its most out- 
rageous forms. The most meritorious are often 
the most poorly paid. In many spiritual occu- 
pations one does the work and another gets the 
pay. Like the Apostle, we should be ready in 
needful cases to work without reward, and find 
our recompense in our good works and in the 
approval of God. The more a minister lives 
under the pressure of hardship, the brighter will 
the light of his religion shine. [But this fact 
will not justify the people in putting the pres- 
sure on].—In all doubtful cases the conscien- 
tious minister will inquire by what course the 
Gospel will most be benefited, and act accord- 
ingly.—Ver. 14: A minister should desire only — 
what is necessary for his support, no more. The 
church should not give him luxuries.—Ver. 15: 
The disinterested minister may, for the sake of 
vindicating himself, remind his people of his 
magnanimous conduct.—A minister must have a 
reputation for disinterestedness. If there is a 
chance for making large gains, and at the ex- 
pense of a good name, let him surrender the 
chance.—Ver. 16. How foolish it is to boast of 
having done our duty! The higher the office is, 
the more disgraceful to our trust. The con- 
straints of duty, to which a pious man freely 
yields, are irresistible. ‘God has put me here’ 
—this thought should accompany the minister 
to his latest breath. To retire from work, when 
not compelled by age or other circumstances, is 
a very questionable procedure.—Ver. 18. Joy 
in serving God, and being assured of his love, is 
the most strengthening reward. A sense of this 
makes free and happy ministers.—Ver. 19: A 
faithful laborer assumes many burdens not 
legally imposed. But when can he ever do more 
than his duty (Luke xvii. 10)? We cannot fully 
perform even what we ought.—Our labor is at 
best piece-work. In saving souls nothing is too 
burdensome, nothing too lowly.—Ver. 20ff: A 
pious man may be many sided; for nothing is 
more manifold than the ways and means of Di- 
vine wisdom in the execution of its designs 
But there is a great difference between the no- 
ble legitimate accommodation of the Christian 
and the slippery by-ways of worldly cunning. 


CHAP. ΙΧ. 24-X. 13. - 198 





Ὁ. Exhortation to earnest self-denial as the condition of obtaining an incorruptible crown; and a warning 
against carnal security. ; 


CHapter ΙΧ. 24.—X. 18. 


24 Know ye not that they which run in a race [race course, σταδίῳ] run all, but one 
receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain [really lay hold of it, χαταλάβητεΊ. 

25 And every man that striveth for the mastery [contends for a prize, ἀγωνιζόμενος is 
temperate in all things. Now they do τέ to obtain a corruptible crown [chaplet, 

26 στέφανον]; but we an incorruptible. I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight 

27 [box, zuxtévw] I, not as one that beateth the air; But I keep under [beat black and 
blue, 6zwzedfw]! my body, and bring ἐξ into subjection [enslave it, dovdaywyd]: lest 
that by any means, when I have preached [been a herald, χηρύξας] to others, I myself 
should be a castaway [a rejected one, ἀδόχιμος]. 


Moreover [For, γὰρ], brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that 
all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were 
all baptized [had themselves baptized, ἐβαπτίσαντο]" unto Moses in the cloud and 

3,4 in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same 
spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them [out of a 
spiritual, following Rock, ἐχ πνευματικῆς dxohovdobons πέτρας: and that Rock was 

5 Christ. But with many [most, τοὺς πλείοσιν] of them God was not well pleased : 

6 for they were overthrown [strewed about, χατεστρώθησαν] in the wilderness. Now 
these things were our examples [became types for us, τύποι ἡμῶν ἐγενήθησαν], to 

7 the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted; Neither be 
[become, γίνεσθε] ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written,® The people 

8 sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, 
as some of them committed, and fell in® one day three and twenty thousand. 

9 Neither let us tempt [put to the full test, try fully, ἐχπειράξωμεν] Christ,’ as* some 

0 of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents. Neither murmur ye, as 

1 some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer. Now 
all [om. all] these things happened unto them for ensamples [typically, 
τυπιχῶς |: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the 
world are come [last of the ages have come, τὰ τέλη τ. αἰώνων χατήντηχεν"}. 

12,13 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. There hath 

no temptation taken [trial seized upon, πειρασμὸς ἐέίληφεν] you but such as is com- 
mon to man [human, ἀνθρώπινος}: but God zs faithful, who will not suffer you to 
be tempted above that ye are able; but will with [in the midst of (Tyndale), σύν 

τῷ π.] the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye” may be able to bear i. 


1 Ver. 27.—Tischendorf has ὑποπιάζω, but the Rec. and Lachmann, in accordance with the most reliable MSS., have 
ὑπωπιάζω. [A. B. C.D. (ist and 4th hand). Sinait. many cursives, Orig., Ephr , (one MS.) Chrys., Theodt., Theophy!., Zcum., 


have ὑπωπιάζω. ¥.G.K. L., with more than 30 cursives, Euseb.. Serap., and a number of copies of the Crook Pathex=; Mave 
Wine estes ζω “ OE ey EN pepe "Ὡς ete τιον aD ae ravuers, nave the Attic. ὑποπιέζω. The Latin 


ξν--. ᾿ς gna 

writers aud versions do not clearly Indicate what reading they followed; they have castigo (vulg.) subjicio, macero, affligo, 
and domc. Reiche, Matthet and Tischendarf have defended ὑποπιάζω. Meyer thinks that this originated in the error of some 
unskilful transcriber, to whom ὕπω with w was offensive. The word ὑπωπ. is found, however, in classic and Hellenistic 
Greek (Robinson’s Lexicon), and occurs also in Luke xviii.5. As an agonistic phrase, it seems to accord well with a num- 
ber of expressions in this whole passage. The English critics have unanimously adopted it.—C. P. W.]. 

2 Chap. x. 1._The Rec. has δέ instead of yap, but in opposition to decisive authorities. The change originated in a mis- 
take with respect to the proper connection. 
,. 2 Ver. 2.—Lachmann has ἐβαπτίσθησαν, on the authority of good but not decisive MSS.; and as the more difficult reading, 
ἐβαπτίσαντο (of the Rec.) deserves the preference. [The passive form is more usual among Christian writers, especially 
with reference to infant baptism, and is given in A. C. Ὁ. E. F. G. Sinait. and 15 cursives; but the middle form is attested 
by B. K. L., Orig., Chrys., and others, and its reciprocal signification was demanded by the Apostle’s purpose, and need not 
have given offence with regard to the subjects of apostolic baptism. Theophyl. gives ἐβαπτίζοντο, and thus confirms the 
conjecture that ἐβαπτίσθησαν was acorrection.—C. P. W.]. 

* Vers. 3, 4.—The different positions given to the words in verses 8 and 4 by different MSS. have no effect upon the 
sense of the whole passage (see Tischendorf). [A.C., et al.. omit αὐτὸ, and Sinait. omit τό αὐτὸ. B.C. (2d hand) and 
Binait. put πνευματικὸν before βρῶμα, and A., with some cursives, put mvévu. ἔφαγον. before βρῶμα. In like manner im 


18 


a wee he -» 











194 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








ee 


it roy Ὡς ὯΝ Ot αὐτὸ. The Rec., with D. F. K. L., τέ al. place πόμα before πνευμ. ἔπιον, while A. B. C. Sinait, εἰ al., place 
Ἢ The Rec. also puts δὲ immediately before πέτρα, with A. C. Ὁ. (24 hand) K. L., and some patristic 
ith no cursives of wuch authority.—C. P. W.}. ΄ 

*7.—Instead of ὥσπερ. the Rec. has ws, but vis probably a correction to conform to the more usual word. 

er. 8.—B. D. ες Sinait. omit ἐν before srg but A. C. Ὁ. (2d and 38d hand) E. Καὶ, L. insert it—C. P. W.}. 

Ver. 9.—Lachmann and Meyer have κύριον with B. C. [Sinait.], et al. Meyer thinks that Χριστὸν and θεὸν (A.) are at 
ypts made to explain the true text. But even if Χριστόν had )een the true reading, it could easily have given offence 
to some, who did not see how Christ-coulu be tempted before His incarnation, and so it might have occasioned the raser- 
tion of κύριον. [the only authorities for θεόν are A., two cuysives, two MSS. of the Slay., and Beda. Χριστόν is adopu ἃ by 
Elzevir, (Rec.) Scholz., de Welle, Osiander, Tisch., Bloomfield and Wordsworth, after D. Εἰ, F. G. K. L., a number of cursives, 
the Ital., Vulg.. Syr. and othec versions, and Theodt., Marcion, Chrys., @cum., Theophyl., Iren., and several Latin Fathers, 
Alford and Stanley prefer κύριον, as more likely to be explained by the insertion of Χριστὸν and θεόν from themergin. On 
tne other hand, Dr? Hodge thinks Χριστόν the more difficult, andso the more probable reading, and that “ while the tempta- 
tion was strong to change xp. into κύρ. no one would be disposed to put the former word for the Jatter.” Much zeal has 
been shown with respect to these various readings on account of their supposed bearing upon the preéxistence of Christ, 
and Epiphanius does not hesitate to charge some with an intentional falsification of the text—He says: ὃ δὲ Μαρκίων 
ἀντὶ τοῦ κύριον Χριστόν ἐποίησεν.--Ο, P. W.]. 

8 Ver, 9.—The Rec. after καθώς has καὶ, but the authority for it is too feeble. [A. B.C. Ὁ. F Sinait. omit it, while only 
D. (3d hand) K. L., ef al., the Syr., Chrys. and Theodt. insert it. It was probably inserted as more usual before καθώς, 
while the only reason for its omission would have bee + to conform to yer.5.—C. P. W.]. 

9 Ver, 11.—The Rec. has πᾶντα after ταῦτα δὲ, but it is wanting in B. C., ef al., and has different positions in the sen- 
tence, thus giving reason to suspect that it must be an addition. (C. K. L., with several versions and fathers, insert it, and 
D. F. Sinait., and some versions and fathers, read: πάντα δὲ ταῦτα.--Ο. P. W.]. 

10 Ver. 11.—ZLuchmann has τυπικῶς, and his reading is well sustained. It is possible that τύποι (Rec.) is an attempt to 
make the passage conform to ver. 6. {Lachmann’s reading is supported by A. B. C. K. Sinait., and some versions and fathers. 
—C. P. W.). 

il Vor i1:—Ree. has κατήντησεν, but Lachm. and Tisch. have κατήντηκεν. The latter is better, but both readings have 
good authorities. [B.D. E. F. G. Sinait., and some Greek Fathers, have the perfect, and Meyer and Alford think the other 
an instance of the alteration which copyists frequently made of the perfect into the aoristform. The other word, however, 
may be an equally appropriate instance of the alteration which the Alexandrian critics frequently made of the aorist into 


the perfect —C. ΡΟ W.). 


12 Ver. 13.—The Rec. inserts ὑμᾶς after δύνασθαι, but it is feebly sustained, and it is probably an addition naturally sug- 
gested by the context for the completion of the sense. [It is cancelled by Lachm., Tisch. Alford, Stanley aud Wurdsw. aiter 
A. B.C. Ὁ. E. F. G. L. Siuait., and most of the versions and Fathers.—C. P. W.]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 24-27. [Having in the last verse (23) 
of the previous section mentioned, as the se- 
cond reason for the renunciation of his rights, 
his desire that he might thereby become partaker 
of the Gospel with those he labored for, he next 
proceeds] to bring home to the consciousness of 
his readers the extent of that self-denial and 
earnest endeavor which is requisite for the full 
attainment of the blessing in question. This he 
does by a reference to the Grecian games which 
were celebrated in their vicinity, v7z., the Isth- 
mian games. [‘‘It must be remembered in read- 
ing the Apostle’s allusions, that from the national 
character and religion of the Greeks, these games 
derived an importance which raised them above 
the degrading associations of modern times. 
How intense an interest these contests still ex- 
cited may be seen from Suetonius’ graphic de- 
scription of the agony of Nero in his desire to 
succeed; an exaggerated instance, doubtless; 
but yet illustrative of the general feeling. The 
stadium, or race-course, of which he speaks, was 
not a mere resort for public amusement, but an 
almost sacred edifice, under the tutelage of the 
patron deity of the Tonian tribes, and surrounded 
by the most solemn recollections of Greece, its 
white marble seats rising like the foundation of 
« tomple in the grasey slope, where its outline 
may still be traced, under te olkwde  -# the huce 
Corinthian citadol, which guards the entrance of 
the Peloponnesus. ‘The race, in which all run; 
the pugilistic contests, in which they strove not 
‘to beat the air,” were not merely exhibitions of 
bodily strength, but solemn trials of the excel- 
lence of the competitors in the ‘ gymnastic art,’ 
which was to the Greeks one-half of human edu- 
cation. ΑΒ the friends and relatives watched 
with breathless interest the issue of the contest, 
they knew that the victor would be handed down 
to posterity by having his name sung in those 
triumphal odes, of which Pindar’s are the extant 





model, and his likeness placed in the long line 
of statues which formed the approach to the adja- 
cent temple. The ‘prize’ which he won from 
the appointed judges, who sat in state at the end 
of the course, was such as could awaken no mean 
or mercenary motives; its very simplicity attested 
its dignity; it was a garland of the Grecian pine, 
which still, under its classical name, clothes with 
its light green foliage the plains of the Isthmus, 
and which was then consecrated to the sea-god, 
around whose temple its groves were gathered. 
(See Conybeare and Howson, 20).—The ap- 
plication of the metaphor of the race to the pro- 
gress of the Christian, here occurs for the first 
time. Afterwards, compare Phil. iii. 12, 14; 2 
Tim. iv. 7,8; Heb. xii. 1. Stantey].—Know 
ye not.—[An abrupt and forcible appeal toa 
familiar fact, analogous to the case in hand, 
fraught with obvious Jessons]—that those 
who run in the race-course. —Here is the 
first illustration—the race (dpéuoc).—run all, 
but one receiveth the prize ?—The a- 
βεῖον is the prize (ᾶϑλον) awarded by the arbi- 
ter (βραβεύς), [‘*Lat., bravium, Irnen. IV. 7, 
whence the English, ‘‘ bravo.” WorpswortH]. 
The point thus made is stated by Osiander in the 
practical remarks: ‘*The danger of failing of 
the end of our faith thro’ a lack of persistent 
earnestness—the large number of the called, and 
the few that are chosen; or, as mere running on 
the course does not ensure the prize, so simple 


eompanionship with those who ave styivine for 
salvation does not ensure its attainment.’ —-Hence 


he briefly and forcibly enjoins.—So rin that 
ye may obtain.—The simplest interpretation 
here would be to refer οὔ τω, so, to éva, that, in 
the sense of ὥστε, as: ‘so run as to obtain,’ 
But it certainly would be more in accordance 
with usage to make the reference to what pre- 
cedes: ‘as that one runs who obtains the prize, 
so run ye in order that ye may obtain.’ [Alford, 
on the contrary, makes the allusion more gen- 
eral: ‘after this manner, viz., as they who run 
all, each endeavoring to be the one who shall receive 


CHAP. IX. 24-X. 18. 


195 





the prize; for the others strive as earnestly as 
he.—The οὕτως is presently particularized by 
one point of the athletes’ preparation being spe- 
cially alleged for their initiation”]. After 
‘‘ obtain,” the word ‘ prize’ must be supplied as 
the object understood. The use of the καταλα- 
Beiv suggests the personal effort shown in the 
matter, literally: ‘that ye may seize, or grasp, 
the prize;’ asin 1 Tim. vi. 12, ἐπιλαβέσϑαι, in dis- 
tinction from which the simple λαμβάνειν would 
denote the mere receiving, or accepting the thing 
presented. The recommendation accordingly is 
toa course of conduct corresponding to the laud- 
able race of him who wins the victor’s wreath, 
in order that they may obtain possession of sal- 
vation, [may ‘work it out’].—That for this an 
earnest self-denying course was requisite, he 
shows from the example of the combatants.— 
now every one.—[‘‘The dé, now, specifies, 
referring back to οὕτως. And the emphasis is 
on πᾶς, every one, thus showing οὕτως, so, to 
refer to the πάντες, all, πο τρέχουσεν, run.” 
Atrorp]|.—that strives.—The general term, 
ἀγωνίσεσϑαι, includes indeed in itself the idea of 
running in the race; but here the primal refe- 
rence is to the preparatory training. [‘‘The 
article (6 αγωνεζόμεν ος) brings out the man 
as an enlisted and professed agonistes (or 
athlete), and regards him in that capacity. Had 
it been πᾶς dé ἀγωνιζόμενος, the sense would have 
been, ‘now every one while contending,’ etc., 
making the discipline to be merely accidental to 
his contending—which would not suit the ori- 
ginal antitype, where we are enlisted for life.” 
Atrorp].—is temperate in all things.—To 
this there belongs self-control in every particu- 
lar: abdstinere venere et vino, and especially a 
strict diet, to make one light, nimble and fit for 
the conflict. [‘*The discipline lasted for ten 
months preparatory to the contest, and was at 
this time so severe, as to be confined to the pro- 
fessional athletes. The diet is thus described 
by Epictetus: ‘Thou must be orderly, living on 
spare food; abstain from confections; make 
ἃ point of exercising at the appointed time, in 
heat and in cold; nor drink cold water or wine 
at hazard;—in a word, give thyself up,to thy 
training-master asto a physician, and then enter 
on the contest.”” Sranney].—But as the prize 
set before the Christian agonistes is nobler than 
that which awaits the earthly athlete, so much the 
more ready must the former be to practice that 
self-denial which is the condition of success.— 
they indeed.—[wév οὖν, immo vero: ‘ov con- 
nects it with the general train of thought, and 
μὲν gives emphasis.” JxELr, 3 730, 6.].—[The 
ellipsis here must be supplied from the previous 
clause: ‘practice temperance’].—in order that 
they may receive a corruptible crown.— 
Such was the prize of the racer in the Isthmian 
games, a mere garland of pine leaves; [and 
elsewhere, of olive, parsley or bay leaves].— 
but we—He here includes himself in their 
ranks as a fellow-contestant. 
be again supplied as above—yet carrying the 
implication of a higher sort of temperance, even 
® moral one, according to the nature of the con- 
test entered into.—an incorruptible.—i. ¢., 
blessedness and glory eternal as the reward of 
grace (comp. 2 Tim. iv. 8; Jas. i. 12; 1 Pet. v. 





The ellipsis must’ 


4).—In ver. 26f., he turns now to speak of him- 

self particularly, showing his own method of 

training and striving as an example.—I then — 
[Ἐγώ is emphatic,—recalls attention from the 
incidental exhortation and reminiscence of the 
Christian state to the main subject, viz., his 
own abstinence from receiving support and its 
grounds.’ ALFORD]. τοίνυν, serves to intro- 
duce particulars under a general proposition 
(Passow). So here where Paul comes to present 
himself as a specimen of the true athlete, who 
has put himself through a thorough discipline.— 
so run as not uncertainly—sc., ‘running.’ 
"AdgiAwe, either, unobserved, unmarked, in con- 
trast with one who distinguishes himself and 
makes himself noted, or, which corresponds 
better with the parallel clause, wncertainly, (1 
Tim. vi. 17), viz., in reference to the goal, being 
certain of the issue. ‘‘In direct course to the 
8081. Mryer. (There are various modifications 
of this interpretation in relation to the goal it- 
self, or to the reaching it, or tothe way thereto, 
comp. Osiander),—so fight I.—He here passes 
over to another kind of contest, viz., boxing 
(τυκτ evo).—as not striking the air.—This 
refers to those random strokes which instead of 
hitting the antagonist, spend themselves in the 
ait; and not to the sham fight which is prepara- 
tory to the real conflict. He is representing 
himself as engaged in actual fight, and not in the 
safe prelude to it, as Chrys., Theoph. and others. 
The whole verse is a description of one occupied 
in the very heat of the conflict. In the positive 
exhibition of his conduct, he abandons the 
participial construction (as in iv. 14), which a 
further explanation renders necessary, because 
he'‘passes out of the metaphor to the literal fact. 
—but I bruise my body.-—Here we have the 
adversary mentioned on which he was thus 
planting his effective blows. It was his body 
(‘*the body of the flesh,” Col. ii. 10); the «*mem- 
bers,” Rom. vii. 28, as the seat of sin—that 
which in its affections and lusts was ever hostile 
to the inner man—the spirit. His energetic 
treatment he expresses by a term borrowed from 
the pugilistic combats: ὑπωπιάζειν, to smite under 
the eyes, so as to make them black and blue; more 
generally, to batter, to benumb. According to 
Osiander, he means by it the mortification of the 
flesh by privations, labors, sufferings endured in 
consequence of his devotion to his calling, and, 
especially, of his renunciation of all right to 
support. We might also conceive an implication 
here of ascetic severities, such as fasting and the 
like,—but not to self-flagellation [the absurd 
practice of which grew out of an abuse of this 
expression]. —and bring it into subjec- 
tion.—dovAwyayeiv implies 2 complete conquest 
quasi servum trahere—‘‘so as to bring the body 
under the control of a moral will.” (Mryrr, Hd. 
3). His motive for this he expresses negatively. 
—lest somehow, having proclaimed to 
others.—By κηρύξας, it is questioned whether 
Paul intended the preaching of the Gospel, which 
the word elsewhere means in the New Testament; 
or whether in the prosecution of his metaphor 
he alludes to the functions of a herald. The 
latter is the more probable, as the term ad όκι- 
μος in the next clause, belongs to the same 
category. The herald is one who calls the 


196 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


--- τ΄’ β΄ πΤἷπΤπΤἷπΠπππππππππππ-π“πΠ Φ’ἷ“ ΠῚ. 


champions into the lists and proclaims the names 
of the victors. Paul also was a herald, who 
summoned men to the Christian warfare, an- 
nounced the terms of the conflict, and was him- 
self also a combatant.—I myself should prove 
rejected.—adoxipoc¢ [unworthy, disapproved, 
reprobate]; by this we are not to understand 
‘disqualified for the conflict,’ but ‘unsuccessful 
in the issue.’ [‘‘An examination of the victo- 
rious combatants took place after the contest, 
and if it was found that they had contended un- 
lawfully, or unfairly, they were deprived of the 
prize and driven with disgrace from the games.” 
AtrorD]. Apostolus suo timore nos terruit; quid 
enim faceit agnus, ubi aries tremuit?* ‘If we 
compare this passage, in which Paul so earnestly 
suggests the possibility of his own short-coming 
below the true standard of a Christian life, with 
ver. 18, from which the Romanists would fain 
draw their doctrine of an opus supererogativum, 
implying a distinction between consilia evangelica 
and precepta (general Christian duties), we shall 
readily see how far removed Paul was from 
fancying that he could do aught transcending 
his moral obligations—a notion which stands in 
direct conflict with the whole ethical view of the 
Apostle.” NeEANpER. [‘‘ What an argument and 
what a reproofis this! The reckless and list- 
less Corinthians thought they could safely in- 
dulge themselves to the very verge of sin, while 
this devoted Apostle considered himself as 
engaged in a life-struggle for his salvation. The 
same Apostle, however, who evidently acted on 
the principle that the righteous scarcely are 
saved, and that the kingdom of heaven suffereth 
violence, at other times breaks out in the most 
joyful assurance of salvation, and was persuaded 
that nothing in heayen, earth or hell could ever 
separate him from the love of God. The one 
state of mind is the necessary condition of the 
other. It is only those who are conscious of 
this constant and deadly power of sin, to whom 
this assurance is given. Inthe very same breath 
Paul says, “Ὁ wretched man that Iam!’ and, 
‘Thanks be to God, who giveth us the victory,’ 
Rom. vii. 24, 25. It is the indolent and self-in- 
dulgent Christian that is always in doubt.” 
Hopce]. 

Ver. 1-5. The illustration derived from 
Grecian life is followed up by one taken from 
Jewish history. The thought set forth and esta- 
blished is the same just considered, viz., the ne- 
cessity of earnest self-denial for a participation 
in the Gospel salvation. Having expressed his 
own anxiety lest, with all his labors for others, 
he himself should fail of approval, he proceeds to 
substantiate his apprehension by referring to the 
case of the fathers. ‘Ihe connection is indicated 
by γάρ [which is the correct reading, and not dé, 
as inthe Rec. See Crit. notes].—For I would 
not that ye should be ignorant, brethren. 
—tThe logic is: ‘there is reason to fear that I 
may become a castaway; for the early history of 
our nation proves that however close may be the 
relation sustained by men toward God, and how- 
ever glorious the promises made to them, it is 
nevertheless possible for such to be rejected at 





*(The Apostle terrifies us with his own fear; for what 
shall the lamb do when the ram trembles]? 


the last.’ In this respect he holds up the people 
of the ancient covenant as a warning to those of 
the new, showing, first, the rich experiences of 
Divine favor enjoyed by the former, in which he 
beholds a type of those dispensed under the N. 
T.; and, secondly, how the majority did never- 
theless fall at last beneath the Divine judgments, 
by yielding to temptations, complying with their 
impious passions, and resisting God. By the ex. 
pression: ‘I would not that you be ignorant,’ in 
which he does not so much remind his readers of 
something well known, as open up before them 
something new and for them significant (comp. 
Rom. i. 18; xi. 25), he calls their attention di- 
rectly to what he has to say, and presses it on 
their earnest consideration. Grammatically it 
points primarily to facts, familiar even to the 
heathen converts, which he brings out in vy. 
1-4; but, in reality, to the significance of these 
facts for the case in hand, viz., that of a number 
(πάντε ς) participating equally in gracious re- 
lations to God, the greater portion (οἱ rAeio- 
vec) through their misconduct fell short of sal- 
vation (comp. ix. 24, wdvrec—eic).—that all our 
fathers.—‘Our fathers’—this is not said from 
the Jewish stand-point (Meyer), but the expres- 
sion squares with the true Apostolic view of the 
relation subsisting between the people of the O. 
T. andthe Ν, T. The Israelites were the spiri- 
tual ancestors of the Christians (comp. Rom. iy. 
12; xi. 17).— were under the cloud.—The 
cloud was the symbol and medium of the Divine 
presence for Israel (Ex. iii. 21), which spread 
itself over the people, protecting them while on 
their march; hence the term ὑπό: under (comp. 
Ps. cv. 89). Beneath this marvellous covering 
and shield the wonderful passage through the 
Red Sea was effected (Ex. xiv. ).—and all passed 
through the sea.—Both acts taken together, as 
accomplishing the critical deliverance of the 
people from a hostile power, are regarded by the 
Apostle as a type of baptism.—and all were 
baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in 
the sea.—The cloud is, in a measure, taken to- 
gether with the water (not symbolically of the 
Spirit) as the element into which they entered, 
and wherein they became, as it were, submerged, 
in order thence to emerge again. According to 
the true reading, he says, ἐβαπτίσαντο 
(Mid.): they baptized themselves, inasmuch as in 
the baptism of adults there is a voluntary enter- 
ing into the Divine bestowments of grace and a 
free surrender to them. As Melancthon says: 
fiducia verbi Mosis commiserant se aquis.*—The 


words, ‘unto Moses,’ cannot mean sub auspiciis 


Mosis, but as always with the verb ‘baptize’ 
they denote the relation or fellowship into which 
they entered with Moses, who, as the servant of 
the Lord, was the mediator of the Divine mani- 
festations. With this there is connected the ob- 
ligation to follow him faithfully as the leader 
given unto them by the Lord, and legitimated by 
Him (Ex. xiv. 31). Gua. 

From the type of baptism which introduces 
into a fellowship of the redeemed, he proceeds to 
the type of the Lord’s Supper, which was the 
confirmation and seal of the former, viz., the fact 
PRRs eet ee 

* [Confiding in the words of Moses, they had committed 
themselves to the waters). 


CHAP. IX. 24-Χ, 13. 





of the feeding upon the manna miraculously 
sent, and the drinking of the rock, by which 
means the preservation of the ransomed people 
was secured. ‘‘ This connecting of baptism and 
the Lord’s Supper as the two sacraments in the 
N. T., whose O. T. analogies Paul here adduces, 
is exceedingly noteworthy. It is a testimony in 
favor of the Protestant view of the duality of the 
sacraments.” NEANDER.—and did all eat the 
same spiritual food.—The “spiritual food” 
or manna (Ex. xvi. 13 ff.) is distinguished from 
all earthly food, either because of some superna- 
tural quality in it, or because of its supernatural 
origin. Here unquestionably we are to suppose 
the latter. The epithet ‘spiritual’ denotes that 
the food came from the Spirit—was produced by 
a Divine miraculous power (comp. Ex. xvi. 14). 
[‘‘Itis here employed in special reference to its 
descent from heaven and its designation in Ps. 
Ixxviii. 24, 25 as ‘‘the bread of heaven” and 
‘“‘angels’ food.”? Srantry. ‘‘ Thus, also, Isaac is 
called, Gal iv. 29, ‘he born after the Spirit,’ in 
opposition to Ishmael, who is spoken of as ‘born 
after the flesh.’” ALFrorp. Worpsworts, how- 
ever, quoting from Bp. Fell, says: ‘the food and 
drink are called ‘spiritual’ because they are 
Christ’s body and blood in types.’”-—Why may 
not all the significations given be recognized? 
Scriptural phraseology has a fulness of meaning 
which ordinary language has not; for there was 
more ‘‘in the mind of the Spirit”? who inspired 
it than the writers themselves even knew]. If 
we assume a supernatural quality in the ‘‘ food” 
and the ‘‘ drink,” we must also suppose that they 
were at the same time aliment for the Spirit; 
but this thought is the less tenable from the fact 
that we cannot admit the referring of the ro 
αὐτό to the believers of the N. T., as if it 
meant, ‘the same with ourselves,’ nor allow the 
identification of these objects with the elements 
in the Lord’s Supper, as Calvin does. The ex- 
pression ‘the same’ is rather to be joined with 
the word ‘all,’ which accordingly holds the em- 
phatic place, and is five times repeated. They 
all united in partaking of the same gifts—a fact, 
however, which did not prevent the majority 
from incurring a terrible retribution. In the 
phrase—they did all drink of the same 
spiritual drink—(to which also most of the 
above remarks apply), Paul has in mind the oc- 
currence mentioned in Ex. xviii. 6, also Numb. 
xx. 10. To this an explanation is appended 
[‘‘and it was needed, because the tradition to 
which it refers is not found in the O. T.”’ Sran- 
LEY].—For they drank of that spiritual 
rock which followed them, and that rock 
was Christ.—The imp. 7c vov, were drinking, 
was intended to denote their continuous drinking 
all through the entire march in the wilderness, 
In the previous sentence we have the aor. ἔπ εο ν, 
signifying the simple fact of drinking.—But 
what do these statements import? Certainly 
not that the term ‘rock’ stands for the water 
flowing from the rock [Lightfoot, Meade], which 
the Israelites conducted along by their side in 
channels, or took with them in leathern bags, or 
which in some way did not further fail them, 
which water meant Christ; or that the rock was 
a symbol of Christ, as of one out of whom streams 
of living water flow. In such a case it would 


19% 
have read, not ‘was Chrisijg » αὶ ae Wer τῇ 
According to a Rabbinical tz... ‘““% ὁ Christ.” 
followed the children of Israel thi'f,-<on, the rock 
journey. [STanuey says that ‘thoughout their 
maintained that there was a well formes tradition 
the spring in Horeb, which gathered itsu‘l out of 
into a rock, ‘like a swarm of bees,’ and folloy }f up 
the people for forty years, sometimes rolling’ed 
along of itself, and sometimes carried by Miriam ; 
and always addressed by the elders when they 
encamped, in the words of Num. xxi. 17: 
“Spring up, Ὁ well, sing ye unto it” ]. Meyer 
thinks that Paul fastened on this tradition to con- 
vey the idea that it was Christ who, in the form 
or apparition of this wonderful rock followed the 
host; as indeed also the Targum on Is. xvi. 1, 
and the Book of Wisdom x. 15ff.; xi. 4, assert 
that the Messias, the Wisdom, was by the side 
of the people for a protection in the wilderness. 
But, however, we may reject some of the absurd 
details only of that tradition, still it must ever 
be considered a monstrous supposition—at any 
rate, one in no wise hinted at in the Scripture, 
that the Messiah, or the angel Jehovah did in 
reality accompany the Israelites in the form of a 
rolling rock. Christ, the preéxistent Messiah, 
the Lord who went with the people on their 
march, as the proper source of this wonderful 
drink, which, according to the bodily sight, 
streamed out of the natural rock, is called in 
contrast with this a spiritual rock—a rock of a 
supernatural kind, which carried in itself a di- 
vine power. ‘The miracle of bringing water 
out of the rock, happened not once, but at least 
twice (Ex. xvii. 6; Num. xx. 11). It was there- 
fore not one particular rock which was con- 
cernedin the miracle; but as often as a like ne- 
cessity occurred, there on the spot was also the 
water-yielding rock again.’’ Now since every 
rock could render the same service by the same 
influence, so it appeared as if the rock accompa- 
nied the Israelites. The material rock, in this 
case, is non-essential; the water-giving power 
is the chief thing. This power was God’s, that 
same God who has manifested Himself to us in 
Jesus Christ. And He is called the Rock that 
followed them, because it was through His 
agency that the several rocks, one after the 
other, acquired the same water-yielding power.” 
Burcer. In like manner, substantially, Abar- 
banel [Wordsworth, Hodge. But Alford detects 
here a typical allusion to Christ in the sacra- 
ments of the New Testament].—Observe also the 
preposition used; it is not dzo, but éx., which is 
not causal, as if it meant thro’ the operation of, 
but it denotes the origin and source from which 
a thing comes. They drank out of a Spiritnal 
Rock, which was Christ [Wordsworth]. Comp. 
Osiander, who, moreover, in the drink, as well 
as in the food, assumes the presence of a super- 
senuous element along with the sensuous, by 
which these objects become so much more real 
types of that offered in the holy Eucharist. To 
this we would not object. The analogy abides 
the same: on both sides there is a food and 
drink of supernatural origin—a bestowment of 
divine life, nourishing and refreshing the human 
life. which, in the agency of the Rock that ac- 
companied Israel in the wilderness, even Christ, 
ensures refreshment from itself, primarily to the 


an 


΄ 


198 


----- 





earthly hea. 9 shp<low (σκιά) of the refreshment 
furnished 'O'—anspiritual life out of the fulness 
of the dro and now glorified Christ, who 
has finisfed the work of a spiritual redemption. 
We myst here hold fast to what our Lord said 
resyecting the contrast between the Old and the 
Yew Testament manna (Jno. vi. 49 ff.). ‘Your 
fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are 
dead. This is the bread that cometh down from 
heaven, that a man may eat thereof and not die.” 

To these lofty experiences of God’s gracious 
manifestations, of which all were partakers, the 
following words form a powerful contrast.—but 
with the greater part of them God was 
not well pleased.—i. 6., they forfeited God’s 
favor and failed of the promised salvation. The 
proof of this—for they were overthrown 
in the wilderness:.—On καταστρώϑησαν comp. 
Num. xiv. 16. [The identical language of the 
Septuagint]. (Heb. iii. 17, ἔπεσον). The word 
πλείονες, the greater part, comprehends more 
than those who were destroyed by the particular 
judgments, of which he afterwards speaks. It 
denotes the entire older generation, who, with 
the exception of Caleb and Joshua, must have 
died in the wilderness, and thus failed of the 
promised land. 

Vers. 6-11. Now.—dé, transitional. He 
here begins the application to his readers, by 
exhibiting the occurrences of the Old Testament 
in the form of ri701.—these things.—raira, 
ἃ. 6.. the judgments implied in the word ‘ over- 
thrown,”—judgments which they incurred in 
consequence of their God-provoking conduct,— 
and which he proceeds to illustrate in particular 
instances.—And these were intended to teach 
Christians what they would suffer under like 
circumstances.—happened as figures of us. 
—The word τύπος, whence our type, in the more 
definite, theological sense, means not simply an 
image, in general, to which the antitype (ἀντίτυ- 
moc) corresponds; but it is used to express any 
event, institution or person that, by a divine ap- 
pointment, foreshadows, upon a lower stage of 
theocratic life, events, institutions or persons 
belonging to a higher sphere. Here, however, 
the word is taken in a purely ethical sense, and 
means example of warning, figures.—The plural 
ἐγενήϑησαν is here used because of tv 7 01.— 
‘Figures of us”’—. e., of our lot in like condi- 
tions. This construction is analogous to that in 
ver. 11; hence it is not to be supposed that the 
subject of the verb is the ‘the fathers,’ under- 
stood, and that weare to take ταῦτα as the accusa- 
tive, meaning ‘in respect to these things,’ in- 
cluding here the manifestations of divine grace, 
as well as of judgment.—{A view of which, Al- 
ford says, ‘‘I know not by whom suggested, but 
1 find it in Dr. Peile’s notes on the Epistles ᾽᾽]. 

The divine intent in furnishing these exam- 
ples is thus stated—[‘‘ of course an ulterior pur- 
pose, for they had their own immediate purpose 
as regards the literal Israel.” Atrorp.]—in 
order that we might not be lusters after 
evil things.—Here we had better understand 
all manner of evil lusts, rather than the specific 
inordinate lust of pleasure (as Grotius). And so 
the following phrase,—as they lusted,—is not 
to be explained simply by the event recorded in 
Num. xi. 4, but by the manifold exhibitions of 
wicked passions made by Israel at that time. 


TRE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








“Exvduuyth¢ means one who is habitually governed 
by desire. The word occurs also in Num. xi. 
84. Under ‘evil things” we are to include 
whatever is a violation of duty or a denial of 
love to the Lord or tothe brethren. Of this sort 
was the eating of things offered unto idols (eldw- 
λόϑυτὰ) by the Corinthians. «The lusting of 
the Israelites after flesh was a wicked ecaprice 
involving contempt of God’s provisions.” Osi 
ANDER.—Under this general head he next selectg 
a particular instance, which is introduced by 
4undé—neither—a particle which does not neces- 
sarily connect matters codrdinate.—become 
ye idolaters,as were some of them.—i. 6., 
by partaking of things sacrificed to idols at the 
altar feasts, which was a species of idolatry. 
This is what the record in Ex. xxxii. 6 refers to. 
There we have an account of the worship of the 
golden calf, and of the offering of sacrifices, ac- 
companied by sensual indulgences. In this 
clause, of course, Paul could not include him- 
self; hence the second person, ‘become ye,’ 
Neanper. By ‘some of them,” Osiander thinks 
that Paul intended the choristers, perhaps the 
stiffest of them who lead off in the dance and 
song, and were afterwards slain by the Leyites. 
It has been finely observed that as the Israelites, 
so also the Corinthians did not regard their con- 
duct as actual idolatry, but both were on their 


way to it.—as it is written, The people sat 


down to eat and to drink, and rose up to 
play.—The word παίζειν, to play, here refers 
to those lively dances which occurred at heathen 
festivals (comp. xxxii. 18ff.). [And many of 
these dances, as is well known, were directly 
designed to provoke the most licentious passions 
—dances, of which many of those now practiced 
in fashionable society are the direct lineal de- 
scendants. Hence the close connection between 
idolatry and fornication, which appears all 
through this epistle. Hammond, however, has 
a long note, which goes to prove that παίζεῖν was 
used to denote not only dances, but all manner 
of wanton lecherous sport, just as kindred words 
are used in many modern languages to express 
the same thing]. Idolatry ought, moreover, to 
be regarded as more than the fountain, for we 
may say, with Osiander, that it is the vilest fruit 
of an intensified sensualism.—Neither let us 
commit fornication as some of them com- 
mitted.—Participation in superstitious practices 
led easily to the commission of that sin, from 
which he now proceeds to dissuade them—going 
back to the use of the first person—* let ws.” 

This, indeed, was also a part of heathen 
worship, especially in the Corinthian tem- 
ples, devoted to: Artemis and Aphrodite; but 
it might also lead to idolatry, as was the case in 
the instance just alluded to (Num. xxy.), where 
the Moabitish women enticed the men, whom 
they had seduced, to idol festivals and so betrayed 
them into idolatry—a danger to which the Cor- 
inthians were much exposed (comp. chap. vy. and 
vi.).— And fell in one day three and 
twenty thousand.—The number given in 
Num. xxv. 9, and also by Philo, Josephus and 
Rabbins, is twenty-four thousand. The discrep- 
ancy is, perhaps, best accounted for by sup- 
posing a failure of memory. Besser says¢ 
“Twenty-four thousand, yet not perhaps ‘de 
stroyed in one day.’” [Hodge says: ‘ Both 


CHAP. IX. 24-X. 18. 


a τ . 





statements are equally correct. Nothing de- 
pended on the precise number. Any number 
between the two amounts may, according to 
common usage, be stated roundly as either the 
one or the other’’]. The feebly authorized 
τέσσαρες is an emendation; other attempts at 
harmonizing are arbitrary (comp. Meyer and 
Osiander).—How indefinite the word τίνες, some 
is, and how it may be used to comprise a great 
multitude, is shown from this passage.—Neither 
let us tempt.—éxmerpadCoperv; ἐκ is here in- 
tensive; itis found also in Matth. iv. 7, tempt be- 
yond endurance.—Christ, as some of them al- 
so tempted.—The allusion here is to the event 
recorded in Num. xxi. 4, where the people becom- 
ing weary of their journey, reproached Moses for 
bringing them out of Egypt, and expressed dis- 
gust at the manna. To tempt God means to put 
God to the proof to see how far His patience 
would go, and whether He would suffer men’s 
unbelief and impatience to pass unpunished; or 
it may denote an impatient demand on God to 
help in some extraordinary way, and a condi- 
tioning of faith upon the result (comp. πειράζειν, 
Deut. vi. 16; Ex. xvii. 2, 7; Ps. Ixxviii. 18 ff; 
Acts vy. 9; xv. 10). According to Meyer, it ex- 
presses the discontent of the Israelites at their 
condition in the wilderness; he takes Paul’s 
warning as aimed at the dissatisfaction of his 
readers with their oppressed circumstances 
during the time of their waiting for the second 
coming of the Lord. But there is nothing in the 
context which indicates this; but rather the con- 
trary. Possibly Paul might have had in mind 
the sacrificial feasts and the desire of the Cor- 
inthians for enjoying them, inasmuch as in this 
there was manifested a disgust at what the Lord 
had furnished to them in their Christian state, 
akin to the loathing of the manna by the Israel- 
ites. In such conduct he might discover a 
tempting of the Lord, a trial of His patience. 
«The Israelites demanded that God should ap- 
point them a mode of life suited to their liking, 
that He would restore them the flesh pots of 
Egypt. In like manner the Corinthians seemed 
to demand of the Lord that He would allow them 
their old heathenish enjoyments.” Neranper, 
Or, he regards them as putting God’s grace and 
power to the test, in that they were exposing 
themselves to the danger of a relapse, and so 
raised the question, whether He would preserve 
them by increased bestowments of His grace— 
in which case then we should find in the Old Tes- 
tament precedent a challenging of God’s power 
and goodness, as to whether He could nourish 
His people with something else besides the man- 
na in the wilderness (Osiander, Stanley). The 
first of these explanations squares best with the 
circumstances presented in Num. xxi. 4, where 
the disgust of the Israelites at that which God 
had provided, was such a ‘temptation’ as the 
Apostle speaks of. [‘*‘It was a daring Him, in 
trying His patience by rebellious conduct and 
sin.” Atrorp; so also Hodge]. Other attempts 
at explanation need not here to be taken into 
account, as they are too forced. —The verb 
‘tempted’ takes for its object the pronoun ‘ Him’ 
implied—though Winer takes it as absolute— 
and by this we may very well understand 
‘Christ’ (comp. ver. 4; Ex. xxiii. 20; Is. Lxiii. 











199 


Ce 





9ff.). If we adopt the reading κύριον, then still 
Christ might readily be understood by the term, 
although the relation to the Old Testament would 
be satisfied if we took it to mean God. [Hence 
whichever of the two readings we adopt, we have 
in this verse strong evidence of the fact that 
Paul regarded the Jehovah of the Old Testament 
as none other than Christ Himself, the Eternal 
Word, who in various ways—in natural pheno- 
mena and in the form of an angel, manifested 
Himself to the Fathers of the ancient dispensa- 
tions, and was the real Ruler and Guide of 
Israel].—and perished.—If we adopt the read- 
ing ἀπώλλυντο, then the Imperfect here would 
denote the progression of the fact: ‘They were 
being destroyed’ (Meyer). Yet the reading ἀπώ- 
λοντο is more strongly supported [and is adopted 
in all the later critical editions].—by the 
serpents, —[7. ¢., the well-known serpents; 
‘The article is so often omitted after a preposi- 
tion, that wherever it is expressed we may be sure 
there was a reason for it.” Atrorp].—The last 
warning is against murmuring—a sin of which 
the Israelites were frequently guilty (Num. xxi. 
4; Ex. xvi. 8; Num. xiv.1ff.; 86 ff.; xvi. 41).— 
Neither murmur ye, as some of them also 
murmured.—tThe particular instance here re- 
ferred to, must be inferred from the judgment 
pointed to;—and perished by the destroyer. 
—The ὀλοϑρευτῆς or ὀλοϑρεύων, destroyer, appears 
in Ex. xii. 28, and it denotes the organ of the 
Divine retribution—the angel executing it; but 
this is not to be regarded as an evil angel (comp. 
Mace. xv. 22 ff.). Since only some are particu- 
larized as murmuring (be the number greater or 
less), likewise their destruction by an extraordi- 
nary judgment, the event alluded to cannot be 
the one narrated in Num. xiv. In that case the 
whole congregation rose in rebellion, and the 
judgment inflicted was the gradual dying out of 
the whole elder generation (unless we restrict 
the affair to the ten spies, who were the cause 
of that uprising, and who died of a plague before 
the Lord, ver. 36ff.). More suitable to our text 
is the circumstance mentioned in Num. xvi., 
where 14,700 persons were snatched away by a 
sudden visitation (ver. 49). Primarily the mur- 
muring here was against Moses and Aaron, be- 
cause of the destruction of Korah, Dathan and 
Abiram, with their company, which was charged 
upon these servants of the Lord. But, in fact, 
it was a murmuring againstGod from whom the 
judgment came [a judgment ‘‘which though it 
is not so specified there, was administered on an- 
other occasion by a destroying angel, 2 Sam. 
xxiv. 16, 17.” Atrorp].—In its application to 
the Corinthians, we are not to suppose that the 
murmuring they were cautioned against was on 
account of inferior spiritual gifts, or because of 
the restriction of their pleasures through the 
regulations demanded in the Christian life, or at 
their general condition as Christians; but rather 
it was the opposition which they were disposed 
to manifest against the teachers given them by 
God, and especially against Paul, an opposition 
which struck directly at the Lord Himself (Osi- 
ander and others). To make the parallel perfect, 
we must suppose the murmuring occasioned by 
Divine retributions, such as that hinted at in xi. 
30: ‘On this account many are weak and sickly, 


200 
and some sleep.”—These references to the Old 
Testament he concludes as he began,—Now 
these things were befalling.—ocvvé Bacvor, 
[the plural verb, where the Gr. idiom would re- 
quire the singular, ‘‘expresses the plurality of 
events separately happening” ]; and the imper- 
fect (were befalling) hints at the constant re- 
petition of the case (Osiander and Meyer).— 
them typically,—ruaikd¢ as above τύποι, 
not in the theological sense, but ‘for example,’ 
ἃ, ¢., in such a way as by a Divine intent to in- 
dicate what would befall God’s people in like 
circumstances under the new dispensation. 
This point is more definitely brought out in 
the following statement.—and are written, 
--ἐγράφη, singular, expresses the union of 
these transactions in the record of Scripture as 
one complete whole.—for our admonition.— 
Here is the purpose of the sacred narrative as 
ordained by God (comp. iv. 14).—unto whom. 
—The relative refers to ‘our’ (ἡ μ ὦ ν), and in- 
troduces an allusion to the near approach of the 
great judicial crisis, thus confirming his warn- 
ing.—have come, or ‘into whose life-time have 
entered, and even now exist’ (perf.),—the ends 
of the ages,—rd τέλη τῶν αἰώνων. By 
this phrase the same is meant which is elsewhere 
termed συντέλεια τῶν αἰώνων, **the consummation 
of the ages” (Heb. ix. 26); or τοῦ aiwvoc, ‘of 
the age”’ (Matth. xiii. 89); also briefly τὸ τέλος, 
“the end’’.(i. 8; xv. 24; Matth. xxv. 3; et al.); 
or πάντων τὸ τέλος, **the end of all things” (1 
Pet. iv. 7). The ‘‘ages” here are the great 
world-periods preceding the manifestation of 
Christ, and out-goings of which mark the in- 
coming manifestation. The αἰὼν οὗτος, the present 
age, is contemplated in its progressive unfolding 
through manifold periods, whose exit finally 
leads to the last decisive crisis which passes over 
to the αἰὼν μέλλων, the future age. Now the 
Apostle regards his time as the time of this grand 
crisis—accordingly as a time of severe trials for 
the faithful, in which it became them to be on 
their guard, and for which it was important for 
them to prepare with earnest self-denial; and he 
presses it upon the Corinthians not to expose 
themselves to the extreme of danger by indulging 
in a false security. ‘Paul had always good rea- 
son for considering the final catastrophe asnear at 
hand, although he held the last time to be much 
shorter than it really was to be. Christianity is 
the goal and end of all earlier revelations, and no 
new one follows it. Hence the Christian is justi- 
fied in considering himself as the terminus to 
which all the earlier developments of revelation 
point and conduct onwards.” NranpER.—Next 
there follows a caution, to which a word of en- 
couragement. is annexed for despairing minds. 

Vers. 12-18. Wherefore, ὥστε [lit.: so that, 
is used with the Imp. or Subj. to introduce an 
inference from what precedes. (Winer P. III., 
@ XLI. 5, note 1)]. Here it fitly leads in the 
practical exhortation deduced from the foregoing 
discussion. ‘Since these events which teach us 
how those who stand in so close a relation to God 
and partake of such exalted privileges, may in- 
cur fearful judgments by their evil conduct, have 
been recorded in accordance with God’s pur- 
poses as warnings for us who live in this last 
most critical period of trial, and are going on to 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





the final judgment—let him that thinketh he 
standeth take heed lest he fall,—i. ¢., be. 
ware how he indulges in a false security. The 
verbs ‘to stand’ and ‘to fall,’ taken from the 
phraseology of the ring, admit of a twofold in- 
terpretation. 1. The former: to stand fast in 
goodness and in faith; and the latter: to be be- 
trayed into sin. 2. The former: to abide in the 
possession of salvation, to be sure of a gracious 
state; and the latter: to forfeit salvation. The 
second interpretation best suits the connection, 
and it presupposes the first. [Hopax puts the 
case more forcibly. The security cautioned 
against ‘‘may refer either to security of salva- 
tion, or against the power of temptation. The 
two are very different, and rest generally on 
very different grounds. False security of salva- 
tion commonly rests on the ground of our be- 
longing to a privileged body (the Church), or to 
a privileged class (the elect). Both are equally 
fallacious. Neither the members/of the Church 
nor the elect can be saved unless they persevere 
in holiness; and they cannot persevere in holi- 
ness without continued watchfulness and effort. 
False security as to our power to resist tempta- 
tion rests on an overweening self-confidence in 
our own strength. None so liable to fall as they 
who, thinking themselves strong, run into temp- 
tation. This probably is the kind of false se- 
curity against which the Apostle warns the Co- 
rinthians, as he exhorts them immediately after 
to avoid temptation ”].—Though the Romish in- 
terpreters think they find evidence here against 
Luther’s doctrine of a fides specialis, accord- 
ing to which a Christian can with the greatest 
assurance be confident of his own justification 
and of his perseverance in it unto the end, yet 
they are opposed alike by the experience of 

Paul himself (2 Tim. i. 12; iv. 8, 18), and of 

many a Christian after him who has enjoyed 
that certitudo jfidet which, as a general thing, the 
Corinthians could not possess from want of firm-. 
ness.—no temptation—~z ei pacudc; this de- 
notes either an ordeal, especially by means of suf- 
ferings and persecutions, to which the verb ‘to 
bear ” may refer ; or, temptation, 7. e., enticement to 
sin, to which the connection with what precedes, 
and the hortatory intent of the whole paragraph 
would point. Both meanings coalesce in the 
thought that their Christian character had been 
put to the proof by painful circumstances, as 
well as by sinful enticements, so as to show whe- 
ther faith was strong; love, of the right kind; 
and hope, firm.—has taken you but such as 
is human.—All apology in reference to the 
temptations they had hitherto experienced, 

though not now existing, and all despair in re- 
gard to the severer trials before them, Paul here 
meets by the statement that what they had thus 
far encountered was altogether ‘human’ ἀνϑρώ- 
πίνοι, ἃ. €., either: proceeding from men (such 
as the fascinations of the surrounding heathen 
life), in contrast perhaps with the properly de- 

monic temptations of the last evil time which was 
to precede the revelation of Christ; or: suited to 
man, to his power of endurance, in contrast with 
the fascinations of a more dangerous sort, for 
overcoming which supernatural grace is re- 

quired. [Hodge prefers the latter as the more 

natural and so the common interpretation. Ol 


CHAP. ΙΧ. 24-X. 18, 


201 


nT, 


shausen, the former]. For their encouragement 
in the future he points to the fidelity of God— 
but God is faithful—. e¢., true to His calling 
and covenant, consistent in His love and pur- 
pose (i. 9), which would appear wholly unrelia- 
ble if he allowed temptations to befall His people 
that transcended their powers of endurance or 
resistance, —who,— ¢ for ὅτι οὗτος, because He,— 
will not suffer you to be tempted beyond 
what ye are able.—This expression seems to 
sustain the second interpretation given to ‘hu- 
man’ above,—showing that a moderate tempta- 
tion is meant by it. Compare the expression, 
Hos. xi. 4; 2 Sam. vii. 14. Besides, it must be 
said that every temptation, though coming pri- 
marily from men, is to be ascribed to Satan as 
the ultimate cause (comp. vil. 5; Eph. vi. 12), 
[and men and devils are alike under the control 
of the Almighty, who permits or restrains at 
pleasure, and to the degree that He sees fit.] 
The limit of permission is the ability to endure 
which God Himself has conferred. And this im- 
plies that with the later, severer temptations 
God will cause the strength of His chosen to in- 
crease (Neander). The same is true in respect 
to the time the temptation will last, of which he 
finally speaks.—but will with the tempta- 
tion make also the escape—éxfaore literally 
means escape, the passing out from, the ἀπαλλαγὴ 
τοῦ πειρασμοῦ of Theoph.; but here it denotes the 
way Br adccaen or the end (---τὸ τέλος κυρίου, Jas. v. 
11). The ‘with’ (συν) cannot indicate contem- 
poraneousness; but it implies only that the 
escape is connected with the temptation, that the 
latter will never be without the former. The 
use of the verb ‘‘make”’ in relation to temptation 
does not conflict with that of ‘‘ suffer,” inasmuch 
as the Divine permission involves a direct provi- 
dence. Even the tempting cause stands under 
the Divine sovereignty, and in its action is depen- 
dent on God. The emphasis lies upon τὴν ἔκβασιν. 
—in order that ye may be able to bear (it), 
—rov δύνασϑαι tbreveyKkeiv.—this clause 
may be taken either as interpreting ‘‘ escape,” 
showing that it will consist in the ability to en- 
dure ; but this does not comport with the idea of 
an escape: or it may be construed as an objective 
clause as rendered above, intimating that the re- 
sult would be such as will comport with the de- 
signs of a faithful God. The verb ὑπενεγκεῖν, to 
bear, suggests the idea of a burden carried, and 
very appropriately, inasmuch as all temptation 
is for the believer as an oppressive weight, or 
that of a hostile attack under which one has to 
hold out, to endure. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1]. A sound belief in the doctrine of the 
saints’ perseverance ig ever accompanied with 
a conviction of the possibility of failure and of 
the absolute necessity of using our utmost endea- 
vor in order to final success. No experiences of 
Divine favor in the past, no circumstances, how- 
ever advantageous, furnish such a guarantee of 
salvation as to warrant spiritual repose. There 
is no perseverance without conscious and deter- 
mined persevering, and the requisite effort can 
be put forth only under the influence alike 
of hope and fear. And he who apprehends 








no danger of being ultimately a castaway 
through neglect or transgression, will lack the 
motive necessary to urge him triumphantly to the 
oal]. 

᾿ τερον spirit of the true Christian agonistes as 
contrasted with that of the false one. ‘* This poor 
life entire for an eternal crown,’”—so A. Knapp 
pithily describes L. Hofacker’s spirit; and this 
is the spirit of every true Christian warrior. In 
view of the crown of life, he hesitates at no sa- 
crifice, is ready for all self-denial, does violence 
to his own nature, and never grows weary of 
mortifying the flesh through the might of the 
Holy Spirit (Rom. viii. 18; Gal. v. 24; Col. iii. 
5). Such as desire to belong to Christ, yet are 
ever yielding to their natural inclinations, and 
deal tenderly with the flesh even though the 
spiritual life may suffer thereby, and they in 
consequence are detained in the heavenly race, 
are put to shame by men of this world, who for 
the sake of temporal gain or renown, willingly 
strain every nerve and incur the most painful 
privations, yea, even hold life cheap in order to 
attain their end (Luke xy. 8). Those who do 
notearnestly contend against whatever endangers 
their heavenly crown, and strive not with all 
their might to overcome the obstacles in their 
way, and so become weak and uncertain in their 
warfare, or who covertly entertain that which 
they ought to oppose, opposing it only for the 
sake of appearances, resemble pugilists who 
spend their blows in the air. Especially shame- 
ful is it for a person who is called to give others 
direction and encouragement in the holy warfare 
not to engage earnestly in it himself, and to 
shrink from the requisite self-denial and to tire 
in the race and grow lukewarm in the fight, so 
as to appear like the herald, who, having pro- 
claimed the terms of the conflict to others, has 
been found himself unworthy of the prize (ix. 
24-27). 

3. diarnat security, its fatal character. The rea- 
son of lukewarmness in temper, of deficiency in. 
self-denying earnestness, of abandonment to all 
manner of impure inclinations, of entanglement 
in ungodly objects, and worldly lusts, of idola- 
trous cleaving to the creature even to the lowest 
self-debasement, of strife with God and His pro- 
vidence both in disgust at the gifts He sends, 
and in murmurs at His judgments—the ground 
of all such bad conduct in those who would still 
be Christians, lies most frequently in a false 
security, in the vain conceit that there can be 
no failure—that the goal of salvation will cer- 
tainly be reached, because a person has once 
been received into the fellowship of believers. 
All such false security in His people, God has 
taken pains to counteract from the beginning, 
and in their history He has furnished warnings 
against it for all time to come. In the judg- 
ments which befell that earlier generation, so 
distinguished for the marvellous bestowments of 
His grace—judgments inflicted because of re- 
peated offences against their covenant God, 8 


threatening has been issued to the Church of 


the New Covenant of a similar fate in like cir- 
cumstances, according to the abiding law of the 
Divine rule (x. 1-11). 

4. Frowardness and false security readily give 
place to despair when severe temptations arise. As 


202 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





in opposition to the former, we must point to the 
Divine retributions in order to awaken a salutary 
fear; so in opposition to the latter we must 
point to the truth of God and the steadfastness 
of His love. God never ceases from His work 
of grace, and will not fail to furnish needful as- 
sistance to honest fighters; and He will moderate 
the measure and duration of the temptation ac- 
cording to the strength He has afforded; so that 
at the right moment He puts an end to the trial, 
in order that those who are tempted may be able 
to endure in the conflict (vv. 12, 13). 

5. Buraer:—A person may be endowed with 
all the seals and tokens of Divine grace, and yet 
through personal infidelity be lost (x. 15). 

6. In Christ all the threads of the history of the 
Divine revelation run together. He is the true and 
sole manifestation of the eternal God. In the 
midst of the ages He entered into the human 
race, and took upon Himself personally our na- 
ture, in order to perfect the work of redemption 
and carry out the purposes of God’s holy love, 
and prepare the way for the final judgment of 
the world, in which He as judge will determine 
the lot of every man in accordance with the 
manner in which he has treated the Divine grace 
proffered him in His word and works. But this 
whole work He has prepared and foreshadowed 
under the older dispensation alike in the promise, 
and in the law, and in the manifoldness of His 
operations and proyidences, whereby both are 
led, established and confirmed in life, and se- 
cured against unbelief and disobedience. As 
the messenger of Jehovah, on whom Jehovah’s 
name is written, who bears imprinted on Him- 
self the Jehovah-character, and carries the 
image of the unchangeable, holy, merciful and 
true covenant God stamped in every word and 
deed, He is Israel’s deliverer from bondage, his 
protector and helper in extremest necessities, 
his wondrous guardian and supporter in want 
which no natural meats may relieve, who out 
of His own fulness furnishes him the life-sus- 
taining manna, who pours out for him the life- 
refreshing water, who bears with him in un- 
speakable patience, but also at the same time 
exercises toward him a judicial severity. And 
what He does, ordains, or controls through His 
own personal manifestation, He has previously 
indicated both through individuals and their 
doings, and through manifold ordinances, ad- 
ministrations and judgments, intended for the 
instruction, for the comfort and warning of us 
in these last days. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Starke :—Ver. 24, The running includes: 1- 
a turning from sin; 2. a turning to the goal, i. 
e., God (Acts xxvi. 18); 3. the exercise of the 
powers of the new man in the obedience of faith 
and the mortification of the sinful life; 4. the 
refraining from all hinderances, such as the lusts 
of the flesh, the lust of the eye and the pride of 
life—and indeed not simply from what is evi- 
dently sinful in itself, but also from things 
otherwise lawful, by which a person may either 
injure himself or put a stumbling-block in the 
way of others.—Ordinarily only one person ob- 
tains the prize; but in Christianity we can all 








obtain it, even though one may run faster than 
the other, provided only that we are steadfast. 
For as the faith is the same for all, so also is the 
race; although the degrees of glory attained 
may be various.—In the race no account is 
made of what man does in his own strength, or 
of his own will (Rom. ix. 16); but if God chooses 
to draw us by His word, and we resist not, then 
He grants the ability to come to Christ, and to 
follow Him, and to run with patience the race 
set before us (Heb. xii. 1 ff.).—Hxp.:—if they 
who run fail of the prize, what hope can those 
have who sit still, or fall back, or stop in the 
way? Ah! the obtaining of salvation is no 
child’s play. Earned indeed was it without our 
labor; and now the prize being there, we must 
strive for it. Earnestness, earnestness, fear and 
trembling (Phil. ii. 12) are necessary to reach 
the spot where the crown is put on the victor’s 
brow (2 Tim. ii. 5).—Standing and running 
both belong to the true Christian—standing, as 
opposed to falling; running, as opposed to idle- 
ness and standing still, and to unfaithfulness in 
falling back (chap. xvi. 13; Heb. xii. 1).—We 
should press to God through all things, and rest in 
nothing but in God (Matth. xi. 29).—With begin- 
ners Christianity is only a walk—they go step by 
step; but with the experienced it is a race.— 
Ver. 25. A Christian is bound to refrain from 
whatever obstructs his course, and to use all 
means for increasing his spiritual strength. The 
particular things to be avoided must be deter- 
mined by each one for himself.—A person must 
be converted to God before he can have peace 
with God, and the pledge of salvation in his own 
soul, and can with a watchful eye avoid whatever 
may disturb his peace or injure his neighbor, 
and therefore ought to be denied.—The hope of 
an eternal crown keeps us from carnal gratifica- 
tion, and is a great incentive to perseverance 
(Rom. ii. 7).—Vv. 26, 27. Lurwer:—As a com- 
batant who swerves from his course must fail of 
his goal, or in fighting makes false strokes, and 
wastes his strength in the air, so is it with all 
who would do good works without faith; for 
they are altogether uncertain as to how they 
stand with God: hence all their doings are mis- 
runs, mis-strokes and mis-doings.—The faith 
which works by love hits the foe squarely; since 
faith allows not of despair, nor love admits a false. 
security.—He instructs best who teaches by ex- 
ample.—He who is void of spiritual life, runs 
by his own strength, and so runs into error 
and sinks at last.—What we venture on in the 
name of Jesus, and at His bidding, obtains the 
crown. What we do apart from Him, is lost 
work.—How many air-strokes and mis-strokes 
are given by those who have not the mind and wea- 
pons of Paul !—air-strokes in preaching, in the 
supposed vindication of truth, in prayer, and the 
like, under the idea that the foe has been finely 
hit or utterly laid low, and that a good work has 
been well done (1 Tim. vi. 3 f.)!—Something of. 
the old Adam still clings to the best of Chris- 
tians: hence they have to fight with themselves 
daily, and as Christ did towards Peter (Matt. 
xvi. 23) show the devil the door.—The flesh 
must obey the spirit, and for this, discipline and 
self-crucifixion are necessary. Woe to those who 
take the covenant of God into their mouth, and 


CHAP. ΙΧ. 





hate discipline (Rom. ii. 17-28) !—Chap. x. 1: ἃ 
The pillar of cloud is a type of Christ, a token of 
God’s gracious presence, for in Christ the Fa- 
ther’s glory dwelleth (John i. 14).—The cloudy 
pillar was to the Egyptians a horror; to the Is- 
raelites a comfort: so is Christ to the godless an 
object of dread: to the faithful a source of con- 
solation. The cloudy pillar departed not from 
the people day nor night; Christ is with us 
evermore. Ver. 2; Baptism isa token of God’s 
grace and beneficence, just as was the passage 
through the Red Sea; it slays the old man and 
makes the new man live. Pharaoh dies but Is- 
rael survives. As God, by His. miraculous fa- 
vors, assured the Israelites of His gracious pre- 
sence and aid, so is holy baptism a strong seal 
of the divine promise, and a sure witness of di- 
vine grace. As the Israelites were pledged by 
their deliverance to believe in Moses’ doctrine, 
so are we pledged by baptism to believe the word 
of Christ and follow His commands. Ver. 3. 
The manna was a type of Christ: 1. as to its 
source—Christ was the bread from heaven; 2. 
as to the place where it was given—the wilder- 
ness is an image of this troubled life; 3. as to 
the mode of gathering it—we must seek Him 
early; 4. as to its enjoyment—the true Israelite 
enjoying Christ, with all His blessings; 5. asto 
the taste—Christ, the bread of life, surpasses the 
most delicious and refreshing food; 6. as to the 
punishment which follows upon contempt; 7. 
as to the provision made for remembrance— 
Christ has ordained a holy supper as His en- 
during memorial (John vi. 31-35), Ver. 4; The 
rock is a type of Christ, the Rock of our salva- 
tion, and the foundation of His Church (1 Pet. 
ii. 6), who, smitten by His sufferings, has poured 
out for us the water of life. Ver. 5. Hep.: The 
manna, the gushing rock, and the pillar of cloud 
could not hinder the destruction of Israel, Where 
was the failure? It was in obedience to the 
truth, and in that holiness without which no man 
shall see the Lord. So also may those who have 
been made partakers of God’s grace, in Christ, 
be finally lost, if they do not remain stead- 
fast in such grace through faith. Ver. 6. 
Where sin is there punishment ensues; on 
pleasure follows pain. ‘he terrible histories of 
Holy Writ ought to serve as the perpetual 
preachers of repentance, and stand as abiding 
monuments of the ever-burning wrath of God. 
If evil lusts were not sin, God never would have 
said: Thou shalt not covet (Rom. vii. 7).—Ver. 
7. It is an abomination to confer on a miserable 
creature the honor which belongs to God alone. 
—Most banquets, and especially marriage feasts, 
among Christians of the present day area very sub- 
tle, yet really wicked idolatry; and an evidence 
of such an inward apostasy from God as would 
justify our calling the participants godless, ἡ, e., 
persons standing in no covenant of faith and love 
with God (ver. 31; Tit. ii. 12).—Ver. 8. The re- 
generate do, indeed, at times, feel the excitements 
of impure lusts; but they allow not themselves 
to be betrayed thereby; they sigh over the evil, 
resist it by the grace of God, and try to quench 
the spark, and pray for forgiveness (Gal. v. 16-- 
24).—Whoredom is athree-fold sin—against God, 
whose temple is desecrated ; against our neigh- 
bor, who is partly offended and partly disgraced 





203 


— 


24-X. 13. 


by it; and against ourselves, by the violation of 
our conscience and the defilement of our hody.— 
Ver. 9. Let us not step out of our calling and 
scorn the means ordained for our temporal and. 
eternal welfare. For Christ means to rule us,. 
and not to be ruled by us.—Ver. 10. Those wha: 
murmur against pious government and faithful. 
preachers, sin not against man, but against 
Christ Himself. What do people mean by com- 
plaining that God does not do rightly by them f° 
If they only considered how far they fail of act-- 
ing in accordance with God’s will, what reason: 
would not every one find to complain of himself !: 
Complain against your own sin, otherwise God: 
will begin to complain of you. What can follow 
then but ruin and damnation (Lam, iii. 39) !— 
Ver. 11. Weare more fortunate than the ancients ;. 
for we not only have the same commands of Godt 
which they had, but also their examples for our- 
instruction, exhortation, warning and comfort.. 
Many other advantages have we also; they have- 
the shadow, we have the substance (Col. ii. 17);; 
they wereservants, weare children (Rom. xiil. 15);; 
they were under the yoke, we are free (Acts xv. 
10); they were taught by Moses, we are taught by; 
Christ (Heb. i. 1f.).—Ver. 12. Hepincur: How 
easy to fall! Watch, pray, trust neither the foe: 
nor thyself. But many think that they are: 
standing, even though they have not yet arisen, 
but are lying buried in the filth of sin. Prove- 
thyself !—If we are imagining ourselves firm and. 
strong, then have we the most reason to fear our- 
weakness and our inability. Distrust of one’s 
self is the ground of the Christian’s strength.—- 
We shun many a fall by lying. beautifully low 
upon the earth (Prov. xxviii. 26).. Shunning all 
hinderances to good, and all temptations to evil, 
and industriously using the means which serve 
for our confirmation. It is a very common 
temptation with young converts to trust them- 
selves too much and not to be rightly observant; 
and hence they are easily entrapped by the 
treacheries of sin, and betrayed into a fall; 
therefore this warning is very needful for them. 
Ver. 18. Hep.:—Those temptations are called. 
human which do not require us to resist unto. 
blood (Heb. xii. 4), and:which do not yet amount 
to the fiery darts of the devil (Eph. vi. 16; 2 Cor. 
xii. 7). Among the temptations of Satan are to. 
be reckoned all those severe trials which believing: 
souls are constrained to endure under the divine: 
permission; although Satan is not altogether: 
quiet in those human temptations which spring- 
from original sin, and from eyil examples and se- 
ductions. Besides these, there are yet divine: 
temptations, wherein God puts our faith to the: 
proof (Gen. xxxii.), purifies and confirms us. 
through all measures of suffering (1 Pet. i. 7, 9, 
12 f.; Jas. i. 8; Heb. xi. 11), and also for our: 
good delivers us to Satan that he may sift us (Luke: 
xxii. 31), and thereby prove that Satan can ayail 
nothing against us (sixth petition in the Lord’s. 
Prayer). Why do ye then complain, ye tender- 
lings? The cross is not so great but that the. 
strength to bear itis greater; the cross carries. 
us, and not we the cross; for in the cross there: 
is power, and there is none in us. With the 
cross comes power, and with the power the cross. 
BERLENBURGER ΒΙΒΙΕ. Ver. 24. Genuine 
Christianity is a real race-course, but the proper 


204 


running on it is no rambling. If people learn 
that they can be made happy by the Gospel, and 
observe that a good thing may be made out of 
Christ, they will devote themselves to Him out- 
wardly, and run after a certain fashion. Many 
du this in a more exact sense when they taste 
the good word of God a little, and submit to re- 
pentance, and begin a pious and honorable life. 
Many continue earnestly in prayer, and in all 
manner of good practices, their life long; but 
yet maintain their own secret designs. But be- 
cause they run in their sinful nature, and not in 
their divine nature, they never reach the goal. 
The Lord Jesus Christ, who Himself ran the 
race, is the Judge and Rewarder of those who 
run it after Him; and besides, He gives unto 
them strength and courage for running. All 
may reach it, provided they are only earnest in 
their endeavors. Why should werun without such 
ahope? But the realization of it takes place only 
in the birth, and in breaking through the strait 
gate into the new divine life, and this demands 
the deepest earnestness and death-struggle, in 
which body and soul may often perish before 
the gate of life is reached and found open. All 
power which is capable of furthering our right 
race towards a sure prize, must be obtained from 
Christ by the prayer of faith. He, by His Spirit, 
extends to us His hand, and leads us by this se- 
cret way. Observe well where your desires run, 
in order that, under a fair show, you may not 
after all be seeking your own ends. We must 
not only run so as merely to imagine that we 
may succeed; but we must earnestly strive ac- 
tually to succeed. Spiritual running consists in 
the eager stretching and straining of the spirit 
after the promises of God in Christ Jesus; from 
this there follows an earnest pressing forward to 
the new birth, together with all needful watch- 
fulness, fidelity and diligence in the daily obedi- 
ence of faith, and mortification of the sinful 
man. Above all is it necessary to. keep one’s 
self disentangled. Besides, the soul must abide 
anwearied in its endeavors to rise to the highest 
good; and even when it would fain stand still, 
or sink down, must it rally again in daily re- 
pentance, through the power of God, and hasten 
zealously along its course. Itis the selfish and 
treacherous carnal understanding which often 
plants itself in the way, and perverts the powers 
of the soul to such things as not only bring no 
reward, but also hinder our obtaining one.—Ver. 
‘25. He who means to race makes himself light, 
and lays aside needless incumbrances. If the 
heart stands open to the Lord, and to His Spirit, 
free from all inordinate delight in and cleaving 
to visible things, and to itself, then it is strong 
in the Lord and filled by Him; and all powers 
of darkness, and the hidden might of sin are 
bound and east out by Jesus Christ, the Lord of 
victory.—Not that suffering and striving earn 
salvation; but the great Awarder of the prizes 
deems no one worthy who does not value that 
which is precious and dear to him above every- 
thing else.—The prize is Jesus, in His Spirit, the 
great mystery of godliness. Those who rightly 
win it have an eternal satisfaction therein. We 
can only stand before the Father in the Son. 
But of Him can we become partakers only in the 
new birth, by which He is formed in the human 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— ee 








ea, 


heart. Therefore must the lovers of Jesus di- 
rect their aim and desire only toward Him; im 
Him will the hungry soul alone delight itself: 
therefore do all its energies go out after Him, 
for whom it counts all things but loss, that 
it may win Christ and be found in Him 
(Phil. iii. 8,9). Draw us and we will run 
after thee! onfirm those whom Thou hast 
drawn, and give us ever new power that we may 
never be weary in pressing forward to this 
prize until it has been obtained.—Ver. 26. Or- 
dinarily there is a lack of clear knowledge and 
certainty as to what is the true prize, and what 
the way to it. The path to life is confusedly and 
wrongly apprehended, and a person’s own 
choices often get mingled in with it. One falls 
upon this and that outward duty, engages zeal- 
ously in prayer his life long, reads all good books 
he can get, exercises himself outwardly in good 
works, mortifications, alms-giving, mean clothing, 
and thinks thus to force salvation by his own 
running and striving, whether he has Christ al- 
ready or not; this is to run uncertainly.—Beat- 
ings of the air are the strokes which are not given 
by the Spirit in the soul. Those persons only 
beat the air who do not hit the foe wkom they 
ought to ward off. They are very zealous about 
others; but have no just perceptions of them- 
selves; they will engage in outward lip-devo- 
tion, and forget at the same time*the inward 
prayer of the Spirit, and earnest striving against 
all sin; they will busy themselves in studying 
and speaking about Divine things, or even in 
disputing about and criticising others, and pre- 
fer this to actual fighting themselves; or they 
will cease from warfare because nature recoils 
from a complete extermination; or they will de- 
vote themselves to the society of other pious 
persons, and entirely forget their own duties; or 
they will rest content with keeping up simply 
fair appearances. And even when one has begun 
in right earnest, what numerous beatings of the 
air often take place in the conflicts of the heart, 
which the Spirit of Wisdom discloses afterwards 
to each one when he-comes truly to seek God! 
In general, it may be regarded as an ineffectual 
warfare when a person is loth to cross his own 
will and flesh, or does not lose his own life even 
unto a true self-mortification, but always keeps 
something secretly in reserve. These the arch- 
enemy still holds in a subtle snare of secret 
lust, just as he may yet hold others through fear 
that they will not properly deny themselves 
every thing out of dread of detraction and mock~ 
ery. Art thou letting go all things seen for the 
sake of something better? Art thou closing up 
thy sense and heart against that which wrongly 
entices thee? And art thou striving earnestly 
against all uprising lust? Art thou wrestling 
also earnestly with God, and holding on until He 
blesseth thee? Art thou risking body and soul, 
and all things for the sake of winning the pearl? 
Holdest thou no agreement with Satan and the 
world, and thine own flesh? And hast thou re- 
nounced these things forever?—Ver. 27. He 
whose senses are not yet slain can never become 
spiritual; but remains always carnal. Each 
one, according to his own condition and his pre- 
dominant affections and temperament, is requireé 
by God to refrain particularly from that which 


CHAP. IX. 24-Χ. 13. 


is most apt to take him captive. 
our body into subjection in order that we may 
not fall into subjection to it. 
sort of theology—that the teacher himself hearken 
to the word of truth, in order that he may ap- 
pear as an example to the flock, and show that 
obedience is possible. He who in this respect 
follows Christ is acceptable to Him and useful to 
men.—Chap. x. 1 ff. It is possible to effect an 
entrance, and then to stand still and lose all that 
has been gained.—In the true baptism we ac- 
quire every thing. Therefore it becomes us to 
enter renewedly every day into the death of 
Christ, and allow the old false disposition to lie 
buried in His grave, and also daily to put on the 
new life in the might of Christ through the 
prayer of the Spirit.—The true bread from hea- 
ven gladly imparts life to the world, previded 
only that we are eager to partake of its fulness. 
As Christ gives Himself for our food, so may He 
also serve as a drink to all who thirst after 
righteousness by means of His Spirit, which is 
the true water of life.—Christ is not a remote, 
but an ever-present Saviour. He ever walks 
with us.—Ver. 5. Many may commit themselves 
to the protection of God (the cloud) and pass 
through floods of tribulation (the sea) ; they may 
be baptized, and enjoy the Lord’s Supper with 
great interest and devotion. Yea, they may ac- 
tually partake of the Lord Jesus in their own 
souls, and yet, after all, fail of the prize, and 
apostatize from God, so that He can have no 
pleasure in them.—Ver. 6. A type—a sketch 
such as shall be preserved for all time. This is 
grounded on the uniformity of the ways of God. 
—In all our conflicts and self-restraints we must 
begin with our desires and lusts, which are the 
root of all evil. The temptations to sin are to be 
attacked in the very first motions towards it 
within us, and suppressed by the Spirit.—Even 
the best things may be turned into occasions of 
sin if they are sought with a selfish will. All 
desires which depart from God and go after the 
creature are impure and reprobate: for God de- 
mands our entire affections for Himself.—Christ 
is our pattern to be imitated. The example of 
Israel, on the other hand, is held up for a warn- 
ing.—Unstable souls are easily seduced to that 
which is false ere they are aware; hence the im- 
portance of shunning promiscuous intercourse 
and putting a tight rein upon our desires.—Ver. 
7. How fares it with the Christianity of the time 
and its festal days? In the morning, if conve- 
nient, people perform their intended prayer and 
worship; then they feast according to their ap- 
petites, and finally rise up to play, or to pass 
time in gossipping, or to indulge in corrupt 
practices. And is this the service to which the 
Israel of God is called ?—He who will walk surely 
must beware of devious paths, and, for the sake 
of his Saviour, avoid the charms of false affec- 
tions, and all idolatry of the creature, and all 
sectarianism, which beguiles him from his Lord: 
then will God also preserve and keep him.— 
Ver. 8. It is the part of true temperance to avoid 
the occasions of sin and all corrupt conversation, 
for we can seldom leave such things undefiled. 
Our fidelity to our proper Bridegroom is mani- 
fested by our carefully avoiding all defilement of 
the flesh and of the spirit, and by abstaiming 





205 


We must bring , from all spiritual adultery through illicit attach- 


ment to any creature. Both these sins incur 


This is the right | sore judgments.—Ver. 9. All discontent and 


murmuring against God and His gifts is a tempt- 
ing of Christ —(Since His incarnation it has be- 
come far easier for us to assail His Light, His 
Word, and His Spirit, because He has declared 
that He is with us every day; especially by 
doubting whether He will fulfil His office in us, 
from the fact that we do not as yet experience 
any victory over sin, or feel the power of His 
presence and love. He who breaks the law and 
tollows his inordinate affections, and still desires 
that God should redeem him, is guilty of tempt- 
ing God.—Ver. 10. A fearful commotion often 
arises in the breast of man if his flesh is not 
gratified: he blames God for His ways, and 
murmurs at God’s instruments. In this way the 
mystery of the Cross is assailed, and the great 
enemy overpowers the soul and suffers it not to 
come and bow before God.—Ver. 11. Since we 
have the example of so many centuries before 
our eyes, the greater watchfulness is demanded 
of us unto whom these last times have come, in- 
asmuch as the harvest and the sifting is at the 
door, and Satan rages against all who are has- 
tening out of Egypt, knowing that his time is 
short.—Ver. 12. If a person intends not to fall, 
he must ground his salvation not upon his own 
strength, and on the fact that he stands, but he 
must cleave to God alone. For if by clinging to 
the Lord we become one spirit with Him, it fol- 
lows that those who do this can no more fall than 
He can fall.—Ver. 13. Man, because he intends 
to be on the lookout. feels safe and fears not 
danger. But when he is assailed, he locks only 
to the temptation and despairs. The heart is a 
deceitful and desperate thing (Jer. xvii. 9).— 
Aside from those human temptations which eccur 
in ordinary life, and spring directly from human 
corruptions, there are others of a superhuman 
and spiritual character; these fall upon us like 
an armed man. Nevertheless they cannet injure 
the faithful (1 John y. 18).—The faithfulness of 
God here stands like a pillar, firm and strong, 
around which all things rage and storm in vain. 
But it is His own pure, unfalsified inclination 
and love to the soul which causes Him to deal 
with it in all respects so prudently and savingly, 
and which prompts Him to omit nothing which 
is for its welfare, and to allow nothing which is 
for its injury. Temptations, so far as they are 
beneficial to the soul, only reveal God’s holiness 
and love; and He soon puts an end to the same, 
so far as their power to overcome is concerned. 
In the converted man there is a certain degree 
of ability. It is God’s power bestowed through 
the Holy Spirit, in which Paul claimed to be able 
to do all things (Phil. iv. 13). Therefore it is 
the fault of our indolence if we think ourselves 
incapable of overcoming any temptation. In all 
truly anointed Christians their ability is equal to 
their temptations. Let one only learn to pray 
aright, and to understand what it means when 
we ask, ‘Cast us not away from Thy presence!” 
God knows already how much He will permit; 
and how to counterbalance it. He permits and 
does not permit. His truth remains fast. The 
eternal, almighty, faithful, righteous God must 
indeed be greater than that which attacks us 


200 





(Jno. x. 29). God is not unrighteous in the 
slightest particular; He asks only what He has 
given. Learn then to know thy abilities, O 
soul, and what thou hast in thee of Christ’s 
power! Regard not the might of sin as greater 
than the power of God. He has loved thee, and 
in love He will keep thee; for thy spirit, which 
is from Him, is a costly jewel in His eyes; this 
He must lay claim to and rescue from all dan- 
ger. He cannot deny Himself in regard to it. 
When He appoints a temptation, He at the same 
time also sets the bound to it, and opens a way 
of escape. Of this a man may assure himself by 
committing himself only to God. The ways of 
escape are as numerous as the temptations. 
When reason sees no termination, then God 
opens a wide door through which the heart that 
had been driven into a corner suddenly discovers 
broad spaces before it; therefore hope in Him at 
all times (Ps. lxii. 9). If He imposes a burden, 
He likewise will help, and will.not impose too 
much, He will measure all things by your ¢a- 
pacities; for we have a faithful High-priest who 
has compassion on our weakness, and will make 
all things possible for him who trusts. He who 
looks one-sidedly, or only at temptation, and not 
at the God, who is with us in the strife, must 
certainly fear and tremble whenever the waves 
appear ready to engulf us.—Ver. 27. The 
Apostle here regards the body as that which 
binds us to the visible world, by means of which 
all outward temptations press, and wherein alse 
our natural desires seek their satisfaction and 
become at last tyrannous habits. Besides, it is 


the body with its needs which gives a plausible. 


pretext for many weak compliances with the 
wishes and fashions of the world. He who holds 
this near foe in subjection rids himself at the 
same time of many others who through it acquire 
power over us. If we treat it rigorously as 
something which must soon be given up to death 
and corruption, and the final dropping of which 
is for the spirit a desirable deliverance, then 
will all which affords us advantage only so long 
as we are in the body appear insignificant and 
trifling —Chap. x. 1 ff. The developments of God’s 
grace continue steadily onward, and grow in 
importance.—Temptations to apostatize press 
most amid circumstances seductive to the flesh ; 
hence the injury of incorporating into our reli- 
gion many such things as are attractive to sense, 
and strike our natural feelings. Of this sort are 
processions, pilgrimages, gaudy shows, the 
pomp and parade of dress, by means of which 
our spiritual faculties are rather overpowered 
than cultivated.—Ver. 11. Persons often feed the 
flesh on the histories of the Old Testament, espe- 
cially on the sins of the ancient saints. But they 
should also remember the judgments which fell 
in consequence.—The Old ‘Testament, so far 
from being ‘‘played out,” has at the present an 
application clearer and fuller than ever before. 
—Ver. 12. The world often talks strangely. Con- 
cede to it the power of godliness in any degree, 
and it suddenly becomes very weak, and begs to 
be excused, knows nothing of such matters; but 
warn it of danger, then how it rouses itself, and 
refuses to acknowledge the presence of tempta- 
tion. The circumspection of Christians it de- 
rides as pure weakness, and their acknowledg- 
ment to divine grace for ability as sheer pride. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ooo 


—Ver. 13. God’s Word does not aim to make ug 
anxious, but only to increase our confidence in 
God, and take from us presumption. 

Heupner:—ix. 24. What a variety of runners 
are seen in the lists of this world, differing in 
strength, zealand aim. This whole life is arun- 
ning after something, and each is anxious to get 
ahead of the other. But the number of those 
who are striving for an eternal goal is small. 
The fewer there are, however, who attain the 
goal, the greater the honor, and this should 
awaken in Christians a holy ambition.—Ver. 25, 
The Christian should exercise a stringent self- 
control. Refrain from defilement of the body 
and spirit through love of pleasure; beware of 
earthly cares, of idleness and sloth, of vanity, 
ambition, cowardice, and of all cross-shunnings! 
Always remember that eternal glory is at stake! 
Like the fading wreath, all earthly things pos- 
sess only an imaginary worth, and therefore 
soon lose it. What do worldly men gain at last 
for all their cares and labors, their restless toil, 
their self-humiliations and fawnings, their 
search and strife? A hand full of sand, a glit- 
tering puff of worldly honor. There is no re- 
ality save in what is heavenly and divine,—Chris- 
tianity an earnest gain. The prize at stake there 
is the highest.—Ver. 26. The Christian warfare 
is no uncertain conflict—no snatching at phan- 
toms, but a striking for a definite object. This 
definiteness imparts consistency to the Christian, 
and gives clearness to his endeavors (Heb. xiii. 
9).—Ver. 27. In a strife which requires opposi- 
tion to every evil lust, and where, instead of 
coaxing and pampering, we must deny the flesh 
all satisfaction, it is necessary to maintain ἃ 
steadfast perseverance and an indifference to 
pain.—He who intends to teach must be doubly 
watchful over himself. ‘‘In the preacher three 
things must preach: heart, mouth, and life. 
The life must illustrate what the mouth speaks, 
and the mouth must speak what the heart feels.” 
H. Miiller.—X. 5, The liberation of the children 
of Israel is an instructive type of our redemp- 
tion; Pharaoh is the image of Satan; the servi- 
tude in Egypt represents the tyranny of sin; 
the pillar of cloud God’s gracious protection. 
The Christian must march through the sea of this 
world; his way lies through the wilderness, and 
he seeks a Father-land in heayen.—Even in the © 
Old Testament the divine agent is Christ, and 
with the believer now He is omnipresent, giving 
us the water of eternal life forevermore. 

Cuap. ix. 24-x. 5.—Pericope on Septuagesima: I. 
Exhortations to earnest endeavors after salvation, 
drawn, 1. from a comparison with the zeal shown 
by men of the world (ver. 24); 2. from the glory 
of the end sought (ver. 25); 8. from the cer- 
tainty of obtaining a prize (ver. 26); 4. from 
the shame of that destruction which would oyer- 
take us, in case of failure (ver. 27); 5. fromthe 
proffered means of grace (chap. x. 1ff.). IL 
Warnings against pausing in our Christian ca- 
reer, drawn, 1. from the consequent loss of the 
end in view; 2. from the loss of the points 
gained, and subsequent lapse into bondage to 
the flesh (ver. 27); 8. from the stagnation of 
our Christianity (chap. x. 1-5), III. The strife 
of the Christian: 1. as to its peculiarities, a, its 
aims, ὦ, its foes; 2. as to the prize; 8, as to its 
means. LV, Christianity in reality and in ap 


CHAP. IX. 24-X. 18. 


| 





- 


pearance: 1. the former—an earnest striving after 
perfection, which alone, yet surely leads to sal- 





209 





exposed to a fall; order, but the authority for such an 
: > ike, and then was reinserted where 
18. The power of ταῦ most of the cursives, the Syr. and 


vation, and by which man becomes a pattern to | there are temptationSne. Some MSS., including A.C: 


his fellow, and acceptable to God; 2. the latter 
—a mere outward union to the Christian Church, 
confession with the mouth, a formal partaking 
of the sacraments without any inward strength- 
ening and confirming of the heart upon the rock 
of salvation, and consequently without any real 
improvement, and therefore displeasing to the 
Lord. V. The causes of a sad mediocrity in 
Christianity: 1. the lack of earnestness; 2. dis- 
regard of the prize; 8. neglect of means (Heub- 
ner). 

ies :—What is requisite in order that a 
fighter for the crown may be temperate in all 
things? 1. He must know what is costliest in 
this world; 2. He must esteem the blood of Christ 
and its preciousness above his own life, and above 
all precious substances.—L. Horacker: ‘“ The 
Christian’s race’’ for the heavenly crown: 1. 
concerning some deviations from the true course; 
2. concerning the true course itself, comp., also, 
J. M. Sartor, ‘‘Saint Paul’s glimpses into the 
depths of wisdom,” p. 176 ff. If thou wilt suc- 
ceed in thy race for the goal, in thy contest for 
the crown, pray, watch, deny thyself, and thou 
wilt find in God eternal life, thy prize and thy 
crown. 

Lone, chap. x. 9:—To those who ask for 
bread, God does not give a serpent (Matt. vii. 
9,10); but to those who will not have His bread, 
He sends fiery poisonous serpents. 

Cuap. x. 6 ff. (Heubner) :—Ver. 6. The history 
of the Jewish nation is a mirror for all mankind. 
Every portion of it can be made an example to 
quicken and to warn.—Do not many Christians 
yet say, that Christianity begets a joyous life, 
and sigh after earlier and forbidden enjoyments? 
—Ver. 7. In all men there lingers some prone- 
ness to heathenism; to deify nature, the visible 
and the material. Subtle poisons are more dan- 
gerous than the grosser ones. Luxurious living 
is a species of idolatry; worldly enjoyments al- 
lure the heart into apostasy from God; the sin- 
fulness of these things consists in the fact that 
they kindle desire, and lead to actual excesses. 
Hence the importance of insisting upon conver- 
sion. The truly converted turn of themselves 
from the world.—Ver. 8. Sensual indulgences 
among the more refined nations are worse than 
among the uncivilized, and inflict greater mis- 
chief.—Ver. 9. Oh that every one in the commis- 
sion of transgression would consider that he is 
tempting Christ; that he is, as it were, challeng- 
ing Him to inflict punishment! This wedo when 
we oppose His Word in unbelief or disobedience ; 
when we are not pleased with His laws, dnd try 
to devise some easier course. The serpents 
which will destroy us are the gnawings of a 
guilty conscience.—Ver. 10. Murmuring is op- 
position to God’s providence, complaint at His 
ways and allotments; and this is a denial of the 
divine goodness and wisdom.—Ver. 11. We 
Christians live in the last period of the world. 
The thought of the speedy winding up of the 
world’s history should make us more faithful.— 
Ver. 12. The fall. of others should make us more 
careful about ourselves. He who thinks he has 
nothing to fear from such temptations is most 











theless, we may say thiting ἐἰδωλόθυτόν in the tormer, 
temptations . since God " 4&th., Aug., Ambrst., Pelag., 
the power of every Man, “the interpolation of τὰ ἔθνη 
so that the temptation neveiin accordance with A B. 
To beginners He gives GAgsit minh tee Εν ΜΙ ΤΩΝ te 
further advanced, heavier ones. hey place the second 
M. F. Besser.—Chap. x. 1 ff: 

unheeded the warning which is co 

five gracious experiences of Israel, aely indicates 
apostasies of that ungrateful people. considered 
marched out of Egypt, and they all wtic: ‘ye 
baptism in the cloud and in the sea, and manner 
enjoyed the first-fruits of the covenant; anuudg- 
so God has redeemed all of’ us Christians ouyjch 
the world of corruption, and called us to the itin 
lowship of His Son, through holy baptism, and 
has placed us upon our way to a heavenly home, 
blessed with the benefits and powers of His king- 
dom. But only those who runin faith to the end 
obtain the prize.—Vers. ὃ, 4. The mere eating 
and drinking at the sacrament alone will not 
serve. It not only profits nothing, but it also 
fearfully injures a person to belong to those 
whom Christ waits upon and refreshes, if through 
unspiritual or unbelieving conduct, those who 
eat and drink make themselves unworthy of the 
spiritual gift.—Ver. 5. No Christian merits the 
divine complacency by virtue of his obedience and 
holy life, but only by virtue of Jesus Christ 
(Eph. i. 6). But although our good Christian 
works may not merit God’s favor, yet our evil 
unchristian works, if we remain impenitent, will 
drive God’s favor from us.—Ver. 6. The proverb 
—history is the instruction of life, is especially true 
in regard to sacred history, which is no lifeless 
narrative, for says Luther: ‘‘the work and goy- 
ernment of God in His Church, is the same from 
the beginning to the end of the world, even as 
also God’s people, or the Church, is thro’ all 
time, one and the same.—-Ver. 7. The spirit of 
the world sets up, sometimes one and sometimes 
another form of idolatry as the order of the day 

Whether the world, in its banquets and balls, 
and theatres, actually crowns idolatry, as at 
Corinth, or whether it deifies the things and 
persons themselves, in which it takes pleasure, 
and uses them as its highest good, it is idolatry 
all the same. What happened in the camp at 
Sinai is still reflected before our eyes. The 
Sundays and feast-days of the Church are se- 
lected as the favorite pleasure-days. [Holy days 
have become holidays]. Lord, lead us not into 
temptation !—Ver. 8. Balaam’s device pleases the 
world when it sees that it is not possible to rob 
Christians of their crown by violence. It knows 
well what ‘‘ takes away the heart”’ (Hos. iv. 11), 
and it loves to present the wine of temptation to 
those who have once escaped from the mire of 
the world. Let us watch and pray that we enter 
not into temptation.—Ver. 11. In this last time 
(1 Johnii. 14), this N.T. time of the end wherein we 
live, those temptations to apostasy occur pre- 
liminary to the judgments which are indicated 
by the types of the earlier times. The five 
temptations of the fathers in the wilderness (viz., 
to greedy lusting, idolatry, whoredom, provok- 
ing God, and murmuring) are our temptations 


/ 


208 





also, and we should seek eye-s4alve from the Holy 
Spirit (Rey. iii! 18), in order to enable us to see 
these temptations in theiy’ present form, unbe- 
trayed by the spirit of t}4e world, which gives to 
evil an innocent or venial name; which calls 
the pursuit of pleasy/re, liberty; gives to idola- 
try and whoredom Zhe name of progress and en- 
joyment of life; . and to murmuring and tempt- 
ing of God, the Mame of independence and man- 
liness.—Ver. /12. See to it, that thou dost not 
fall! The tempter can throw no standing Chris- 
tian by force. 

Vers. %-13. Pericope on the ninth Sunday 
after Trinity: I. Heathenism among Christians: 
1. Desseription, a, as to its source—the evil, 
godless mind; 3, its immediate effects—excesses 
anci crimes (7, 8); ¢. final result—unbelief and 
despair. 2. Application for self-examination, 
‘mourning and quickening. II. The mode of avoid- 
ing falling in the midst of temptations. 1. By 
observing the multitude of temptations (ver. 6), 
especially those which are particularly danger- 
ous to ourselves (7-10). 2. By laying to heart 
the punishments which will be inflicted in case 
we fall—both physically and spiritually (8-10). 
8. By humility, by the recognition of our own 
weakness, and by realizing the consequences of 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





er 


[Barnes, ix., ver. 27:—1. Ministers, like 
others, arein danger of losing their souls. 2. The 
fact that a man has preached ἰο many is no certain 
evidence that he will be saved. 3. The fact thata 
man has been very successful in the ministry is no 
evidence that he will be saved. 4. It will 
be a solemn and an awful thing for a success- 
ful minister to go down to hell. 65. Ministers 
should be very solicitous about their personal 
piety. 

R. Souru, x. 18:—How, and by what means, 
God delivers us from temptations. 1. If the force 
of the temptation be chiefly from the vehement 
importunities of the evil spirit, God often puts 
an end to the issue by rebuking and command- 
ing down the tempter himself. 11, If the force 
of the temptation be from the weakness of a 
man’s mind, God delivers by mighty, inward, 
unaccountable supplies of strength. ΠῚ. If 
from unhappy circumstances, by a providential 
change in the whole course of his life. IV. If 
from the powerful sway and solicitation of some 
unruly affection, by the overpowering influence 
and operation of His Holy Spirit. Two con- 
siderations: 1. The strongest temptations to 
sin are no warrant for sin; 2. God delivers 
only those who do their lawful utmost to deliver 


error (11-12). 4. By trust in God, and prayer 


themselves ]. 
for support (ver. 13). 


D. A dissuasive from partaking of idol feasts, as involving a fellowship with idolatry, and therefore hos- 
tile to all_fellowship with Christ in His supper. 


CuapTer X. 14-22. 


14, 15 Wherefore, my dearly [om. dearly] beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to 
16 wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of [the, τῆς] blessing which we bless, 
is! it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is! it 
17 not the communion of the body of Christ? For we beiny many [Because we, the 
many, of πολλοί ἐσμεν] are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers? of 
18 that one bread. Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the 
19 sacrifices, partakers [common participants, χοινωνοί] of the altar? What say I 
then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is 
any thing [that that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing, or that the 
20 idol is any thing]?? But J say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they 
sacrificet to devils [they sacrifice,‘ they sacrifice to demons, om. Gentiles] and not 
to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship [be communicants, xoww- 
21 νοὺς γίνεσθαι] with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of 
devils; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils, 
22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he? 


1 Ver. 16.—The verb ἐστίν, is sometimes placed after κοινωνία, and sometimes after Χριστοῦ. The latter position has 
the best authority in its favor. [Tischendorf, in both questions of this verse, puts ἐστίν immediately after κοινωνία. In 
the first question he follows A. B. Sahid. Copt. Syr. Cyr. Aug. Beda. Lachmann, Bloomfield, Alford, Stanley and Words., 

lace it at the close of the sentences, not only on account of external evidence (C. D. F. K. L., Sinait., Ital., Goth., Chrys. 

heodt., Ambst.), but because the other order seems to be a correction to avoid the harshness of this verb at the end of 
the sentence, and in such close proximity to the other ἐστίν. In the second question, the Sahid. omits ἐστίν altogether, and 
B. agrees with those authorities which placed it after Χριστοῦ in the first, in putting it at the end of this sentence; and only 
A. Copt. Syr. Cyr. Aug. and Bede make it precede τοῦ σώματος.---Ο. P. W.}. 

[? Ver. 17.—Before μετέχομεν, D. Ἐ ¥.G., the Ital. and several copies of the Vulg. (not amiat.), Ambrst., Pelag. and Bede 
{ngert Kai τοῦ ἑνὸς ποτήριον. Ὁ. and B., however, omit évds.—C. P. W. |. 


CHAP. X. 14-22. 





209 





$ Ver. 19.—In the Rec. the words ἐΐίδωλόν and ἐίδωλόθυτόν occur in their inverse order, but the authority for such an 
order is feeble. ‘The seecnd word was probably thrown out by the copyist through mistake, and then was reinseited where 


it seemed most fitting (the cause before the effect) 


(The Rec. is sustained by K. L. and most of the cursives, the Syr. and 
Gothic versious, and Chrys. and Theodt., and is adopted by Bloomfield, Osiander and Reiche. 


Some MSS., including A.C. 


(ist hand) Sinait. and Epiph. entirely omit the question relating to ἐζδώλον. In favor of putting ἐἰδωλόθυτόν in the tormer, 
and é(éWAov in the latter question, we have B.U. (2d hand) D. Sinait. (Ist hand), Vulg., Copt., #ith., Aug., Ambrst., Pelag., 
Bede, and this order is preferred by Tisch., Alford, Stauley and Wordsworth.—C. P.W.]. 

4 Ver. 20.—Rec. has θύει τὰ ἔθνη, δαιμονίαις Over, but it is opposed by decisive authorities. The interpolation of τὰ ἔθνη 


made necessary the alteration of θύουσιν into θύει. 


Lachmann puts the second θύουσιν after θεῷ, in accordance with A R. 


C., etal. [In favor of τα ἔθνη, we have A.C. K. L. (placing the words after ὅτι), Sinait., e¢ al., Vulg., Goth.. Copt., Sahid., Syr. 
Chrys., Theodt., Orig., Aug., Bede. In favor of θύουσιν (twice) we have A. B. Ο. ἢ. Εἰ. #.G., Sinait. The text as given by 


Tisch. is: ὅτι ἃ θύουσιν δαιμονίοις θύουσιν καὶ ov θεῷ. 
θύουσιν after θεῷ.--Ο. P. ΥΥ.]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 13. [Having enforced the duty of re- 
nouncing their rights and restricting their 
liberty by a reference to his own example of 
self-denial and its motives, he now returns to 
his main subject, from which he digressed at 
the commencement of chap. ix., viz., participating 
in the sacrificial feasts of the heathen. ‘But 
whereas before he dwelt only on the scandal to 
others, he now in accordance with the train of 
thought, begun in ix. 23, dwells chiefly on the 
evils to themselves. And the sense of this evil 
is enhanced by the recollection incidentally in- 
troduced in x. 3, of the only Christian institution 
which bore any resemblance to these feasts.” 
Sraniey ].—Wherefore,—d:167¢p shows that 
the following exhortation is deduced from what 
goes before. And this may be either the whole 
paragraph from’ver. 1, as: ‘in view of the 
judgments inflicted upon Israel and recorded 
for your warning, flee,’ efc.; or it may be what 
directly precedes, as: ‘ since the faithfulness of 
God pledges to you the results of such watchful- 
ness,’ efc.; or: ‘since ye have a God so faithful, 
therefore shun whatsoever would cut you off 
from His fellowship.’—What is expressed gene- 
rally in ver. 12, is now resumed with particular 
reference to the case in hand.—flee from ido- 
latry.—By this he enjoins the avoidance of every 
thing, which, however remotely, would imply 
participation in idol worship. The preposition 
‘from’ (ἀπό) adds force, g. d., ‘keep yourselves 
aloof from.’ [‘‘ The only safety is in keeping at 
a distance. This includes two things; first, 
avoiding whatever is questionable; and, se- 
condly, avoiding the occasions and temptations 
to sin.” Hover]. The use of the simple accu- 
sative as the object of ‘ flee,’ would not, however, 
necessarily indicate that they had been already 
involved in idolatry (comp. 2 Tim. ii. 22), For 
what follows it appears that he had in mind at- 
tendance at idolatrous festivals.—The address— 
my dearly beloved—imparts to the exhorta- 
tion an urgent and affectionate tone. 

Vers. 15-21. As to wise men I speak.— 
In proof of the fact which occasioned the above 
exhortation, wiz., that they by participating 
in idolatrous feasts, were taking part in idol 
worship—a proceeding which was one with the 
worship of devils, and wholly inconsistent with 
the Christian profession, he appeals to their own 
insight and good sense, which placed them in a 
position to judge for themselves of the correct- 
ness of what he was about to say. In so doing 
he at the same time gives them to perceive his 
own strorg conviction of its truth, which he held 
to be so palpable that he could safely entrust it 

14 








Alford and Stanley have the same text, only they place the second 


with their decision. The ‘as’ merely indicates 
the point of view from which he considered 
them.—judge ye—ipeic, is emphatic: ‘ye 
yourselves.’ Whether in this winning manner 
there lurks a delicate slant at their lack of judg- 
ment, some touch of sarcasm, is a question which 
we will not now discuss.—That participation in 
idol altar-feasts involved participation in idol 
worship, is shown, first, from the analogy of the 
Lord’s supper. He starts with the cup, while 
that which naturally follows is connected with 
the bread. [‘ This mention of the cup first, be- 
fore the bread, both here and at ver. 21, is re- 
markable. Why was this? 1. Perhaps there 
was more danger of those immoral and lascivious 
consequences, against which he is writing, from 
excesses in the wine at the idolatrous feasts, than 
in the meats. 2. The Apostle has thus shown 
the essential independence ot the cup as a necessary 
part of the Holy Communion, and supplies a 
caution against Romish error. 38, Each of the 
elements is variously put first in the Holy Scrip- 
ture, to show their equal dignity and the equal 
necessity of receiving each.’ WorpsworTH |.— 
The cup—ro ποτήριον is undoubtedly accusative, 
corresponding to τὸν ἄρτον by attraction (comp. 
Matth. xxi. 42). Of course the contents are in- 
tended.—of blessing ;—-+xo called, either from 
its effects, as it brings a blessing [so Olshausen]; 
or, preferably, from the act which immediately 
precedes, so that the words—which we bless 
—are epexegetical of it. By this we may un- 
derstand the thanksgiving alluded to in (xi. 24; 
Matth, xxvi. 27), and interpret: ‘which we 
receive with thanksgiving ’—an interpretation 
which transcends the meaning of εὐλογοῦμεν ; or 
the consecration (comp. Ley. ix. 16), and then 
interpret: ‘which we set apart by prayer to a 
holy use’—an act which certainly included 
thanksgiving. The expression is derived from 
the observance of the Passover, when the third 
cup which went round was called 5957 
~ Ia 


Di.* The subject of the verb ‘we,’ denotes 


the whole congregation, which unitedly conse- 
crated the cup by prayer and thanksgiving. 





* 6 ΤῸ is observable that two of the Evangelists, Matthew 
(xxvi. 26) and Mark (xiv. 22), use the word εὐλογήσας, having 
blessed, in their description of Christ’s action at the institu- 
tion of the Lord’s Supper, before the consecration of the 
bread; and Luke (xxii. 19) and Paul (1 Cor. xi. 24) use the 
word εὐχαριστήσας, having given thanks ; but in the benedic- 
tion of the cup Matthew (xxvi. 27) and Mark (xiv. 23) use 
the word εὐχαριστήσας, whereas Paul uses the word εὐλογία 
here. This variety of expression gives us a fuller and clearer 
view of the nature of the act here spoken of. It was eucha- 
ristic and also eulogistic; it was oné of thanksgiving and 
one of benediction, and in the application of each of the 
terms to each of the elements, we learn. more fully and 
clearly what the true character of the Holy Communion is, 
and what are our duties in its administration and reception.’ 
WorbdswoRTH (ad sensum)]. 


- 


210 





_ [Observe the/first person plural is the same 

throughout; the blessing of the cup and the 
breaking of the bread—acts of consecration, 
were pot the acts of the minister, as by any 
authority peculiar to himself, but only as repre- 
sentative of the whole congregation (oi πάντες). 
And so even Estius, but evading the legitimate 
inference. The figment of a sacerdotal conse- 
cration of the elements by transmitted power, is 
as alien from the Apostolic writings as it is from 
the spirit of the Gospel.” Atrorp. And Stan- 
ley also comments to the same effect.]—is it 
not the communion.—«otvovia is not the 
precise equivalent of ‘communication’ [as the 
Rheims version translates it, and as some insist 
on rendering it, in support of a sacramental 
theory]; even in Heb. xiii. 16; Rom. xy. 26; 2 
Cor. 1x. 18, it may denote participation, which, 
however, is certainly not without communica- 
tion. But the word here is used by metonymy 
for the means of communicating or participating 
(comp. Jno. xi. 25). [So Hodge: ‘The means 
of participating.” Alord trauslates ‘‘participa- 
tion.” Calvin:. “It is that connection which we 
have with the blood of Christ, when He ingrafts 
all of us together into His body, that He may live 
in us and we in Him.” Tyndale and Cranmer 
give “partaking.” But the E. V. seems to hit the 
imeaning best: ‘communion of,” which implies 
a fellowship, a common sharing in the blood of 
Christ, according to the meaning of the root, 
κοινός, common, whence Κοινωνέω, to have a thing in 
common, to have a share of a thing. This deriva- 
tion shows that the idea of fellowship in the par- 
taking is prominent in the word. It ever denotes 
a social act. And this idea is essential to the 
argument of the Apostle.] The strong literal 
sense of the verb ‘‘is,’”’ must also be retained. 
This is not employed in a symbolic sense, as 
though it meant signifies; but it simply affirms 
the fact. The eating of the bread is the com- 
munion. This is required by the argument. 
[‘‘ lf we render ἐστιν, symbolizes, the argument is 
made void.” Atrorp. So Hopa@x: “*He who 
partakes of the cup, partakes of Christ’s blood.” 
But it may be asked here: ‘in what sense?’ 
This, of course, is not here explained. But it is 
in some real, veritable way predicable of all who 
partake. Otherwise the parallel with the idola- 
trous act rebuked, would not be sustained. 
Paul means to show that as by means of the 
sacrament we truly come into communion with 
Christ, so in the idolatrous feasts, whether a 
person intends it or not, he does worship the 
idol. Hodge, however, says: “This of course 
is true only of believers.” But if the fact of 
‘communion turned upon the presence or absence 
of faith, the participant at the idol feast might 
fairly reply, ‘I am not guilty of idolatry in this, 
for I eat without faith in the idol.’ And this 
was precisely what Paul designed to preclude 
by asserting the veritableness of the communion 
in drinking of the cup.] But does this view 
lead to the doctrine of a substantial identifica- 
tion of the wine with the blood of Christ, of a 
union of the elements with the matter of the 
sacrament (res sacramenti) ? The Apostle is treat- 
ing primarily of the participation of individuals 
in that to which the thing they partake of re- 
fers; or, in other words, of the fact that they, 


THE FIKST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





— 
through that of which they partake, come inte 
fellowship with that particular religious sphere 
to which the thing partaken of belongs. Here 
in the instance before us, it is with the blood 
of Christ, the ground and seal of the New 
Covenant; in the other case with idols, the 
sphere of a devilish heathenism; hence with 
devils themselves. Meanwhile, if nothing else 
hindered, we might suppose a real communion 
between the wine and the blood, since κοινωνία 
may be variously interpreted according to diffe- 
rent analogies.—of the blood of Christ.—1. 
e., the blood shed on the cross, not His bloody 
death, as may be seen from the parallel term, ‘*the 
body.” It is the blood of the covenant by which 
the forgiveness of sins and the whole salvation 
it includes is purchased (comp. xi. 26; Matth. 
xxvi. 28), [the blood which has in itself also 
the Eternal Life, and to partake of which se- 
cures a pardon unto life eternal].—the bread 
which we break.—[Thelr_aking of the bread 
was a formal public act, a part of the solemnity 
ot che sacrament, in accoruance with the example 
set by Christ, significant of the breaking of 
Christ’s body for us. The custom theretore of 
having the bread ready broken put on the table, 
as practised in some churches, or that of the 
Romanists in putting a wafer unbroken on the 
tongue of the communicant, must be condemned 
as contrary to the precedent of the eazly 
Church.] The consecration is here presupposed. 
—is it not the communion of the body of 
Christ ?—It is a question here whether the 
word ‘body’ is used figuratively of the Church, 
which is the body of Christ, as some would in- 
terpret it, both here and in ver. 16. The parallel 
with the word ‘blood,’ decides this in the nega- 
tive, since there is nothing in this connection 
which the blood can be understood to symbolize; 
nor is there aught in the context which con- 
strains us to such an interpretation. ‘It ap- 
pears from this passage that the Lord’s Supper 
has been instituted as a real communion, and not 
as a meré symbol.” NeanpER.—because one 
bread, one body we the many are.—#r: εἰς 
ἄρτος é σῶμα οἱ πολλοί ἐσμεν. It would be natural 
to assume here a protasis and an apodosis, as: 
‘because there is one bread, therefore are we 
the many one body.’ But to this it must be 
objected, 1. Paul very seldom introduces a pro- . 
tasis with ὅτε (xii. 15 f.; Gal. iv. 6, are doubtful 
cases); 2. the course of thought would in this 
way be interrupted, and we should have here a 
logical parenthesis, which is not to be supposed 
unnecessarily.—The ὅτι, because, evidently in- 
troduces an argument for the leading thought in 
the previous verse, viz., that the bread is the 
communion of the body of Christ. This is esta- 
blished by the effect produced in the Christian 
consciousness through partaking of the bread, 
that is, the union of Christians in one body,.as 
a complex organic whole. This union is grounded 
in the fact that the bread is the veritable com- 
munion (κοινωνία) of the body of Christ. The 
sacramental bread is such a means of union in 
so far as it mediates the fellowship with the body 
of Christ, surrendered to death in behalf of all, 
and hence, a living fellowship with Christ the 
Saviour of all. But in educing this argument 
from the text, we are not to take the expression, 


CHAP. X. 14-22. 





‘one bread,” as parallel to that of ‘‘one body,” 
making them both alike the nominatives after 
‘we are,’ rendering the sentence [as the E. V. 
does]: ‘‘we are one bread and one body,” be- 
cause, if for no other reason, in the next sen- 
tence which adduces a proof of what is here 
stated, ‘‘one bread” stands for the bread of the 
supper, while it here would be a figurative ex- 
pression for the unity’ of believers, just as 
“body” is, The ele ἄρτος, one body, must 
therefore be taken as an independent clause with 
ἐστίν, 5. supplied. The relation of the two clauses 
then will be either that of a comparison: ‘as 
there is one bread, so are we one body,’ or they 
will stand related as cause and effect: ‘since 
there is one bread, therefore are we, the many, 
one body.’ [So Meyer and Hodge, also Ham- 
mond, Locke, Whitby, Calvin, Beza, Bengel, and 
the Syriac version; but Alford, Stanley and 
Wordsworth adhere to the E. V. Alford says: 
“76 are one bread by the assimilation of that 
one bread partaken.” ‘But this,” says Hodge, 
“is to make the Apostle teach modern physio- 
logy’ ].—The above rendering is confirmed by 
what follows,—for we all partake of that 
one bread.—(ék τοῦ ἑνὸς ἄρτου pertéy.). 
This again is variously explained. We may 
either take ἐκ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἄρτου, from that one bread, 
as the direct object of peréyouev, partake, and 
read [as the E. V. does]: ‘‘we all have part or 
partake of that one bread ’””—which is contrary 
to the otherwise uniform construction of μετέχειν 
(which requires the Gen. or the Accus. after it), 
and may be accounted for by supposing ἐσϑίειν, 
or κλᾶν, understood. Or we may, as in ver. 80, 
make τοῦ ἑνὸς σὥματος, of the one body, supplied 
from the context, the object of μετέχομεν, partake, 
and regard ἐκ as expressing the cause of such 
partaking, rendering it because of. Then the 
clause would be an explanation and confirmation 
of what precedes. [So Meyer; but this seems 
artificial and far-fetched, and is contrary to all 
the versions and the majority of the commenta- 
tors. It is better to adopt the common render- 
ing]. ‘The ‘body of Christ,’ of course, is to be 
conceived of spiritually; the idea, therefore, is 
not the same asin what precedes. The mediating 
thought between the statement, that the sacra- 
ment of the Supper communicates the body and 
the blood of our Lord, and the statement, that 
the Church is the body of the Lord, is this, that 
individuals by celebrating the Supper come into 
communion with each other. Bread and wine 
are to the Apostles vehicles through which com- 
munion with Christ is realized.” Neanprr. The 
declaration, ‘‘there is one bread,” obliges us to 
conceive of the bread at the Supper as one whole, 
whether it is one loaf that is broken, or several. 
But this oneness leads us back to the κοινωνία of 
the body of Christ as its ground.—In ver. 18 we 
have a second analogy to prove the unsuitable- 
ness of Christians partaking of idolatrous altar 
feasts. Itis drawn from the Jewish feasts fol- 
lowing sacrifice.—Behold Israel after the 
flesh.—Iopa7yA κατὰ σάρκα, one idea; there- 
fore without the article before κατὰ σάρκα. The 
designation is in contrast with that of ‘Israel 
after the spirit’’ (comp. Rom. ii. 28; Gal. iv. 29; 
Chap. vi. 16); it means the Israel which is so, 
not by virtue of a Divine spiritual life arising 


211 


--- 


from faith (Gal. iii. 7), but by natural descent. 
—are not those who eat the sacrifices.— 
[ὦ e., those parts which are not sacrificed. For 
the practice of eating the remainder, which was 
left after the parts specified, Lev. iii. 8, were 
offered up, see] (Deut. xii. 18; xvi. 11).—par- 
takers with the altar?—xowwvol τοῦ ϑυσιαστη- 
piov may be-interpreted either, ‘associates of the 
altar,’ inasmuch as they shared the flesh of the 
victim offered with the altar (comp. ix. 13); or: 
‘persons standing in communion with the altar,’ 
7. €., in religious connection with it, inasmuch as 
the festival acquired a religious significance by 
its relation to it. Therefore it is he does not 
say, ‘partakers with God,’ by which only the 
more general communion would be denoted, 
but not this stricter one (Meyer). To subjoin 
therefore ‘‘ with God,” is needless and unsuita- 
ble. [Stanley says the reason why he did not 
say ‘with God,’ was ‘‘chiefly because commu- 
nion with God was too high a thought to be 
brought down to the level of the mere outward 
ceremonial of the fleshly Israel.” But this idea 
is contradicted by Rom. ix. 4, 5. As Hodge well 
puts it: ‘*The question is not as to the intention 
of the actors, but as to the import of the act, and 
as to the interpretation universally put upon it. 
To partake of a Jewish sacrifice as a sacrifice, 
and in a holy place, was an act of Jewish wor- 
ship. By parity of reasoning to partake of a 
heathen sacrifice as a sacrifice, and in a holy 
place, was an act of heathen worship.—It need 
hardly be remarked, that this passage gives no 
ground for the opinion that the Lord’s Supper is 
a sacrifice. This is not the point of compari- 
son’’].—In yer. 19 he draws the conclusion he 
has been aiming at in this whole exposition.— 
What then am I saying ?—. 6., ‘what is the 
result to which lamcoming?’ He begins his an- 
swer by repudiating an inference which might 
be drawn in contradiction of his statement in 
viii. 4. Is it—that what is offered in sacri- 
fice toidols is any thing ?—~. ¢., possesses 
reality, is veritable flesh consecrated to a god ?— 
or that an idol is any thing ?—. ¢., has 
being as the very god which the heathen imagine 
(comp. vill. 4 ff.); or, changing the accent and 
reading εἰδωλόϑυτον---εἰδωλόν te ἔστιν, he would 
say: ‘that there ig any idol-offering, or any 
idol—namely, of the sort mentioned?’ Both 
constructions amount to the same thing.—But 
[ἡ e., ‘nay, but;’ this ellipsis of the negative 
taken up by ἀλλα, is found in classical Greek]. 
—And now comes his direct statement—that 
what things they offer (it is) to devils 
and not to God, they offer (them).—The 
text is quoted from the LXX. version of Deut. 
xxxii. 17, which seems to be adduced as autho- 
ritative proof of his position. See also Baruch 
iv. 7, ϑύσαντες δαιμονίοις καὶ od Ved. His mean- 
ing is: ‘This I say, that ye by partaking at 
heathenish festivals come into communion with 
devils ; just as we through the bread which we 
break come into communion with the body of 
Christ, or as the Israelites through their sacri- 
ficial feasts come into communion with the altar, 
tz. e., of God’s sanctuary.’ Before explaining 
himself, however, on the point that the heathen~ 
ish sacrifices with which those feasts were con- 
nected, were offered, in fact, to devils, and instead 


212 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


NE 


of drawing his conclusion directly, he states it 
in the form of an injunction—and I would 
not that ye should have communion 
with devils—the very thing he would convict 
them of doing—and then he assigns a reason for 
this in the following, vv. 21, 22.—Such we con- 
ceive to be the logic of the Apostle (as Osiander 
and others). But Meyer understands it differ- 
ently. He finds in vv. 16-18, a justification of 
the warning in ver. 14: ‘Flee from idolatry ;” 
and in yer. 19f., a repudiation of an inference 
which might be drawn from the analogy of the 
Jewish sacrificial festival (ver. 18) ; since by this 
he seemed to acknowledge a veritable communion 
with the gods in the heathen altar-service, and 
with this also the actual divinity of the idols 
worshipped in it.*—Since the idea of communion 
runs through the whole passage to ver. 21, the 
first exposition of the order of thought merits 
the preference.—The δαιμόνια, demons, to whom 
the heathen sacrificed, are not imaginary gods— 
sub-deities, as it were; but, as is seen both from 
the connection and from the uniform usage of 
the LXX. and the New Testament, they are evil 
spirits, the chief of whom is διάβολος, diabolus, 
the devil. The expression in Acts xvii. 18: ‘‘he 
seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods,” is 
adapted to the usage of the Greeks [for the word 
δαιμόνιον was employed by them in a compara- 
tively good sense, to denote the objects of their 
worship]. ‘‘It is probable that in order to ex- 
hibit the abominableness of all participation in 
idol-worship, Paul designedly chose an expres- 
sion, which indeed among the heathen was used 
to denote their deities, but which among the Jews 
always designated evil spirits.” Bzunarn. To re- 
gard heathendom as the devil’s kingdom, was a 
mode of thought prevailing among the ancient 
Church, and well founded (comp. Osiander, p. 
455f.). We, therefore, mustcertainly distinguish, 
especially in the sphere of the Hellenic religion, 
between the opinion and intent of idol worship- 
pers, and the objective powers actually operating 


*[We here give Stanley’s ingenious and valuable note 
entire. “From this passage his meaning has often been 
taken to be that, although the particular divinities, as con- 
ceived under the names of Jupiter, Venus, efc., were mere 
fictions, yet there were real evil spirits, who under those 
names, or in the general system of pagan polytheism, be- 
guiled them away from the true God. (So Ps. xevi. 5, πάντες 
οἱ θεοὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν δαιμόνια). Such certainly was the general 
belief of the early Christians. But the strong declaration 
in viii. 4, reiterated here in verse 19, of the utter non-exist- 
ence of the heathen divinities, renders it safer to understand 
him as saying that in the mind of the heathen sacrificers, 
whatever Christians might think, the sacrifices were really 
made to those whom the Old Testament called δαιμόνια. It 
is in fact a play on the word δαιμόνιον. The heathen Greeks 
(as in Acts xvii. 18, the only passage where it is so used in 
Biblical Greek) employed it as a general word for ‘Divinity,’ 
and more especially for those heroes and inferior divinities, 
to whom alone (according to the belief of this later age), 
and not to the supreme rulers of the universe, sacrifices as 
such were due. The writers of the New Testament and the 
LXX., on the other hand, always use it of ‘evil demons,’ 
although never, perhaps, strictly speaking. for the author 
of evil, who is called emphatically ‘Satan,’ or the ‘ Devil.’ 
It is by a union of these two meanings that the sense of the 
passage is produced. ‘The words of Deut. xxxii. 17, truly 
describe their state, for even according to their own confes- 
sion, although in a different sense, they sacrifice to demons.’ 
A similar play on the same word, although for a different 
object, occurs in the Apology of Socrates, where he defends 
himself against the charge of atheism, on the ground that 
he believed in a demon (δαιμόνιον); und that demons (δαιμό- 
wa) being sons of gods (θεῶν παίδες), he must therefore be 
acknowledged to believe in the gods themselves ᾽]. 


in heathenism, which obtained Divine honor te 
themselves by darkening the human mind. But 
it would be wholly arbitrary, were we to ascribe 
to the Apostle the idea that the offerings of the 
heathen were presented to the devils in so far ag 
these persuaded the heathen that there are gods 
to whom sacrifices must be offered, in order to 
receive to themselves under the name of gods, 
Divine worship and sacrifices (Riickert).—The 
‘fellowship with devils’? which he would not 
have them hold, was not merely a symbolic one, 
but an actual one, by means of which they would 
expose themselves to their corrupting influences 
(comp. Osiander, Bengel).—The wish just ex- 
pressed he grounds upon the irreconcilableness 
of a participation in heathenish festivals, which 
involve communion with devils, with a partici- 
pation in the Lord’s Supper.—Ye cannot.— 
The inability here expressed is of a moral kind 
—a moral impossibility.—drink the cup of 
the Lord,—that is, the cup of the Lord’s Sup- 
per, which belongs to the Lord, has been conse- 
crated to Him, and is the communion of His 
blood; therefore, brings us into fellowship with 
Him.—and the cup of devils,—that is, the 
cup consecrated to demons, which brought a 
person into actual relations to them, and out of 
which wine was drunk at the sacrificial feasts, 
with pre-libations in honor of the gods.—Ye 
cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table 
and of the table of devils.—The table signi- 
fies the entire meal, including the consecrated 
food. [‘‘From this passage probably, ‘the table 
of the Lord’ became an expression current in all 
ages of the Christian Church. See Suicer in 
voc.” ALrorD]. In this verse the Romish Church 
unwarrantably finds evidence for the doctrine 
that the Lord’s Supper was not simply a sacra- 
ment, but also a sacrifice (Cone. Trid., 22, 1). 
“It is not the Church that offers Christ in com- 
munion; but Christ offered Himself up once for 
all (Heb. vii. 27; ix. 25, 26; x. 10; xii. 14, 18); 
and He brings to the Church the bread and wine, 
not for an offering, but to be eaten and drunk, in 
order that by this means He may give His own 
body and blood for their nourishment, according 
to His promise.” W. F. Bessrr. 

Ver. 22. Or do we provoke the Lord to 
jealousy ?—This is not to be taken conjunc- 
tively,—neither by assuming irregularity of for-. 
mation, nor yet in accordance with the sense, as if 
it were deliberate. The indicative is still more 
emphatic. His meaning is, ‘ye cannot unite the 
two (ver. 21). Or, are we the persons who by 
such an attempt will venture to provoke the Lord 
to jealousy ?’? Such would certainly be the result, 
inasmuch as we would be practicing communion 
with evil spirits hostile to the Lord, while pro- 
fessing to hold communion with Him who insists 
on our keeping ourselves exclusively His. The 
expression, ‘‘ provoke to jealousy,” is taken from 
Deut. xxxii. 21, and is taken from the metaphor 
of a marriage between God and His people, 
which pervades large portions of the Old Testa- 
ment, and in accordance with which the Church 
is represented as the bride of Christ (comp. 2 
Cor. xi. 2). It denotes the strong displeasure 
which arises in consequence of adulterous love, 

‘Cand is the fiercest of all human passions. It 
is therefore employed as an illustration of the 


CHAP. Χ 14-22. 


213 





hatred of God towards idolatry. It is as when a 
bride transfers her affections from her lawful 
husband in every way worthy of her love, to 
some degraded and offensive object.” Hopax]. 
The jealousy is one which is sure to bring severe 
punishment; and this is what one seems to 
challenge upon himself who is not accustomed to 
fear the might of the Lord. Hence the con- 
cluding question— Are we stronger than 
He ? —so that we can avert His retributive 
power? 


\ 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Communion with the Lord and in the Lord— 
such is the fundamental generic idea of the 
Lord’s Supper. He is in us, and we in Him; 
and therefore all united together—members of 
one body, composed of all those who have fellow- 
ship with Him. But this communion is not sim- 
ply one of the Spirit, effected through the word 
received in faith, by means of which His Spirit 
bears witness with our spirits that we are the 
children of God; it is not a purely spiritual one 
in the sense that Jesus, by His Spirit alone, 
makes His dwelling in the hearts of all who be- 
lieve. But it is one which is accomplished also 
through the body, and includes, likewise, the 
physical life. It is His atoning life offered up for 
us—His body broken in death for our sakes— 
His blood shed in our behalf, of which we par- 
take by means of the bread and wine. And this 
life of Jesus is imparted to us in its totality, as 
fitted to nourish, strengthen and refresh our 
life—in short, as food and drink for our life in its 
totality ; that is, for our new life, which is from 
God which, begun in Christ at thé new birth, is 
perfected at last in the body also, at the resur- 
rection; for He is the Redeemer of the body 
(comp. John vi. 54; Rom. viii. 11). 

But how is this nourishment imparted? This 
is the point on which the various confessions of 
the Christian Church begin their strife. If we 
keep in mind Paul’s expression, ‘the commu- 
nion of the body and blood of Christ,” it will be 
seen that we, by no means, do justice to it by 
holding the extravagant hypothesis (of the Ro- 
mish Church) that in virtue of the priestly con- 
secrating word the bread and wine are trans- 
formed into the veritable body and blood of 
Christ ; for in that case we could not speak of 
holding communion [inasmuch as eating the ma- 
terial substance would be a mere physical act, 
which would be perfect without the concurrence 
of the Spirit ].—Neither does it satisfy simply to 
assume that the elements are mere symbols—that 
the body and blood of Christ are exhibited and 
made present to the consciousness of faith 
through the bread and wine, and that so by 
means of these, a communion of the believing 
participant is effected ;—whether it be, as Zwin- 
gle supposes, that the believer partook of the 
broken body and blood shed, by being more fully 
assured thereby of the forgiveness of sins, or, as 


Calvin supposes, that a mvsterious union ensues. 


for the believer with the glorified life of Christ 
in heaven. The Apostle’s language, ‘the bread, 
the wine, is a communion of the body, of the 
blood of Christ,” means yet more. If the bread 
and wine are the means of our communion with 











the body and blood of Christ, it is obvious that 
there is a participation in these very objects 
themselves, as, indeed, in the passage, John xi, 
25 (cited by Meyer), Christ calls Himself the re- 
surrection, and the life, ἡ. ¢., that very thing by 
which the life is again restored and imparted, in 
so far as He is in His own person the life, and the 
life of humanity again restored.—This brings us, 
then, to Luther’s view, v7z., that of the mysteri- 
ous union of the elements with the body and 
blood of Christ, effected through the power of 
Christ’s Spirit in His Word—a union with His 
redeeming life, not only as it has been, but as it 
is now, everywhere present and glorified. 


It will, indeed, be asked, ‘‘how does this hy- 
pothesis suit with the original institution of the 
Supper, when such a union could not have ex- 
isted ? and are we then to distinguish between 
the first celebration of the Supper and all others 
that have ensued?” We must, at all events, af- 
firm, with Gitinger (‘* Theology drawn from the idea 
of life,” translated by Hamburger, p. 244), that, 
as in the case of baptism, so also here, a gradual 
progression may be traced. ‘‘ Before Christ 
died and rose again, the disciples received the 
flesh and blood of Christ, efficiently (eficienter), 
rather than substantially (substantialiter); but 
after the ascension, both substantially and effi- 
ciently.”—Through this union the bread and 
wine become a spiritual meat and drink, 7. e., 
a nourishment of the new spiritual life, which, 
however, in the case of those not qualified to 
enjoy it, serves not to nourish, but to condemn— 
even as the Gospel is to some a savor of life unto 
life, and to others a savor of death unto death. 
—This is not the place to treat more particularly 
of manducatory participation, and of the par- 
ticipation of the unworthy.* 


2. Inconsistency of attempting to hold fellowship 
with the world and Christ at the same time.—To sit 
down at the table of the Lord, and to commune 
with Him by partaking of His body and blood, 
and then to convert aught into an idol, or by 
idolatrous proceedings to devote one’s self to the 
god of this world and to his spirits, and so to 
profess them, are intolerable contradictions. 
He who dares thus, exposes himself to the seve- 
rest judgments. By such conduct he violates the 
holy claims of the Lord to his person, which 
having been redeemed and honored by Him, 
with all the blessings of His redemption, belongs 
to Him exclusively—wholly and solely, even as 
a bride to the bridegroom. And such conduct 
involves the greater folly from the fact that 
Christ is one to whom all power in heaven and 
earth is given, and before whose bar all must 


* [We let our author’s statement of sacramentarian theo- 
ries, and his expressed preference, pass without debate. 
The main point of doctrine he has well brought out in the 
first paragraph; and some will think that the Calvinisti¢ 
theory of the “ Real Presence” will answer all its demands, 
In the words of the Westminster Catechism, the sacrament 
of the Supper may be said “‘to represent, seal, and apply 
Christ and the benefits of the new covenant to all believers.” 
And this is done through the Spirit who takes of the things 
that are Christ’s, and shows them unto us in His ordinances 
according to their intent. Those interested in the question 
bere mooted, we would refer to the current works on Dog- 
matic Theology, also to Hooker, Ecc. Pol., B. V., c. 67; Ep« 
WARD IrvinG, “ Homilies on the Lord’s Supper.” Coll. Writ- 
ings, Vol. II., p. 489 ff. J. M. Mason, “ Letters on Frequent 
Communion.” Works, Vol.I. p. 372 ff.—D. W. P.]. 


214 





stand to receive the final decision affecting their 
eternal weal or woe. 

[8. The sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, a 
pledge of the resurrection of believers. As the 
consecrated bread and wine were the authentic 
symbols of Christ’s body and blood, and were, 
in construction and certain effect (though not in 
substance), the same with what they stood for, 
to all worthy receivers; it is manifest that bodies 
40 incorporated with the body of Christ, must of 
course be partners with it in a glorious resur- 
rection. Thus was the Eucharist ever considered 
as a sure and certain pledge to all good men of 
the future resurrection of the#r bodies, symboli- 
cally fed with the body of Christ. This is the 
argument which the Christian fathers insisted 
upon, and with this they prevailed. See Water- 
land on ‘* Zhe Doctrinal Use of the Sacraments” 
(Vol. VIII., p. 182). (Worpsworrs)]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarxe:—vVer. 14. A Christian must be very 
careful how he, in any way, participates in a 
false worship (2 Cor. vi. 14).—Ver. 15. A true 
minister, who is sure of his doctrine, will urge 
his hearers freely to test its truth, so that they 
shall feel that they hayeto do, ποῦ 80 much with 
him as with God, whose doctrine he preaches. 
So, too, a proper hearer will look not so much to 
the minister as to God in the matter of doctrine 
(2 Cor. i. 24; Acts xvii. 11).—Ver. 16 (Spe- 
ner). The doctrine that the bread and wine are 
the communion of the body and blood of Christ, 
is to be taken in its plainest acceptation—they 
are the very means by which the participants 
take part in the body and blood of Christ. Ac- 
cordingly, faith is not made the communion or 
the means of participation, in which case those 
who approach the table without faith could not 
be said, in any sense, to receive such blessings ; 
but the bread and the wine are themselves the 
things. Hence, he who partakes of these comes 
also into connection with the blessings them- 
selves.—Ver. 17. Where Christ’s body is there 
is love, chap. xii. 13.—He who receives the sac- 
rament testifies that he is in the communion of 
Christ and His Church.—Ver. 19. To the pure, 
all things are pure; yet many things may be 
rendered impure by circumstances. Hence 
great circumspection is needful to purity.—Ver. 
20. All false worship is a worship of the devil, 
and those who participate in it shall receive the 
recompense destined for their lord (Rev. xviii. 
4).—Ver. 21 (CKtinger). There is no profit in 
serving two masters, and just as little in trying 
to sponge on them both. If the world’s baits de- 
light, let Christ’s feasts alone (Matt. vi. 24; Jer. 
xvi. 8).—Ver. 22. To be obstinate and imagine 
that we must keep up acquaintances and friend- 
ships, and that God will not be very exacting in 
the matter, is an abominable presumption, cal- 
culated to provoke God’s righteous wrath.—How 
will God let such miserable sophists run their 
course till they are made aware of His power 
(Job ix. 4, 19; xxxvii. 28) 

Bervens. Brsie:—Ver. 14. If we are attempt- 
ing to serve God in the spirit of truth, through the 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ceremonial practices and works of the flesh. 
But then we must be careful to drink often and 
much of the spiritual drink, and eat the spiritual 
food. Christ Himself is both these. In Him 
is everything given:to us spiritually and di- 
vinely ; in Him there is everything to be had 
freely and without price—everything which can- 
not be found in this world’s wilderness. He will 
surely care for soul and body. Therefore flee 
from Babel, the idolatrous land. When it pur- 
sues we must run: otherwise its idols will slip 
into our hearts.—Ver. 15. Who has the Spirit of 
Christ, has also the spirit of a sound judgment. 
No prudent man will be sure of anything, the 
ground of whose truth he does not find in him- 
self.—Ver. 17. True Christians, as members of 
Christ, constitute one spiritual body, and are 
nourished by one meat—the body of Jesus. A 
sweet communion of sanctified spirits ought, in 
this way, to be established and fostered. Let us 
be one, even in this, that we have no fellowship 
with idols.—Ver. 20. Men often trust their fan- 
cies rather than God, and regard it as spiritual 


‘pride, as it were, to mount up to Him, and will 


disoblige none. So it goes, although one does 
not betake himself to the right source (Ps. 
xxxvi. 9; Jer. ii. 13; xvii. 18).—Ver. 21. What 
does it mean that a person presents himself occa- 
sionally at the Lord’s Table, when throughout 
his whole life Belial is uppermost in his heart! 
What a pretence to think of satisfying God with 
the outward forms and postures of a lifeless 
worship, while we are sacrificins to our own 
pleasure, and are intent on gratifying our senses 
with vanity! All who live after the lusts of the 
flesh eat of the devil’s table.—Those who tread 
under foot Christ’s body and'blood, drink rather 
of the wine of His wrath, and eat the bread of 
His anger. But priests who cause the people to 
sin by their evil example, or by failing to rebuke 
sin through shameful weakness, and who do not 
instruct the people sufficiently will be obliged to 
give an account, not only for themselves, but also 
for the people they have had in charge. 

Hrupner: — Ver. 16. God’s demands are 
always endorsed by our own consciences.—Ver. 
20. 'I'o the Christian all evil is an abomination, 
because it brings him in contact with the king- 
dom of evil. Do nothing, however indifferent 
in itself, if according to the intent anything un- 
righteous or ungodly is indicated by it.—Ver. 
21. Participation in the Lord’s Supper binds us 
to strict separation from everything unhallowed, 
because it implies the most, intimate union with 
Christ. Hence, after communion, a true Chris- 
tian can hardly divest himself of a certain degree 
of anxiety.—Ver. 22. Communion with the un- 
holy is a challenge to Christ, because it is a con- 
tempt of His Majesty. Indeed, the thought of 
our weakness ought to awaken in us a salutary 
fear of our Almighty Lord. 

W. F. Besser :—Ver. 18, God will indeed pro- 
tect us; but we can cherish this consolation only 
when we flee from every occasion to sin, unen. 
snared by the conceit of our steadfastness.—Ver, 
21. Greek and Roman pagans were wont to con- 
secrate a crowned beaker to Bacchus. Is it any 
less idolatrous when apostate Christians now 


proffered grace of Christ, we shall abandon all | celebrate the name of a man, some hero of the 
idolatry, such as consists in serving God through | times, with gluttony and wine-bibbing, with im- 


CHAP. X. 23-XI. 1. 





pure jests and buffoonery, and with the tacit de- 
nial or uttered blasphemy of God? Oh, how 
dozs the world laugh when partakers of Christ’s 
Table run into the web which the devil spins at 
his banquets of pleasure. Every observance of 
the Lord’s Supper ought to impress on us the 
words of Paul, “776 cannot be partakers of the 
Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.”” Woe 
to us if we undertake to do what Christians can- 
not! The Lord is a jealous bridegroom of His 
bridal Church, and to put contempt on Him, or 
to provoke Him to jealousy (Deut. xxxii. 21), is 
to imitate the sin of the children of Israel, who 
tempted Christ (ver. 9). 

[Barnes :—Ver. 20. The custom of drinking 
toasts at feasts and celebrations arose from this 
practice of pouring out wine, or drinking in 
honor of the heathen gods; and is a practice 
that partakes still of the nature of heathenism. 
It was one of the abominations of heathenism to 
suppose that their gods would be pleased with 
the intoxicating draught. Such a pouring out 
of a libation was usually accompanied with a 
prayer to the idol god, that he would accept the 
offering; that he would be propitious; and that. 
he would grant the desire of the worshipper. 
From that custom the habit of expressing a sen- 
timent, or proposing a toast, uttered in drinking 
wine, has been derived, The toast or sentiment 
which now usually accompanies the drinking of 
a glass in this manner, if it means anything, is 
now also a prayer: but to whom? to the God of 
wine? to a heathen deity? Can it be supposed 
that it is a prayer offered to the true God; the 
God of purity? Has Jehovah directed that 
prayer should be offered to Him in such a man- 
ner? Can it be acceptable to Him? Hither the 
sentiment is unmeaning, or it is a prayer offered 
to a heathen god, or it isa mockery of Jehovah ; 
and in either case it is improper and wicked. 
And it may as truly be said now of Christians as 
in the time of Paul, ‘Ye cannot consistently 








215 





drink the cup of the Lord at the communion 
table, and the cup where a prayer is offered to a 
false god, or to theedead, or to the air; or when, 
if it means anything, it is a mockery of Jehovah.’ 
Now can a Christian with any more consistency 
or propriety join in such celebrations, and in 
such unmeaning or profane libations than his 
could go into the temple of an idol, and partake 
of the idolatrous celebrations there? - 

Hopar:—Ver. 20. It was of great imp6rtance 
for the Corinthians to know that it did not depend 
on their intention whether they came into com- 
munion with devils. The heathen did not intend 
to worship devils, and yet they did it; what 
would it avail, therefore, to the reckless Corin- 
thians, who attended the sacrificial feasts of the 
heathen, to say that they did not intend to wor- 
ship idols? The question was not, what they 
meant to do, but what they did: not, what their 
intention was, but what was the import and effect 
of their conduct. A man need not intend to burn 
himself when he puts his hand into the fire; or 
to pollute his soul when he frequents the haunts 
of vice. The effect is altogether independent of 
his intention. This principle applies with all 
its force to compliance with the religious services 
of the heathen at the present day. Those who 
in pagan countries join in the religious rites of 
the heathen, are just as much guilty of idolatry, 
and are just as certainly brought into fellowship 
with devils, as the nominal Christians of Corinth, 
who, although they knew that an idol was nothing, 
and that there is but one God, yet frequented 
the heathen feasts. The same principle also ap- 
plies to the compliance of Protestants in the re- 
ligious observances of Papists. Whatever their 
intention may be, they worship the host if they 
bow down to it with the crowd who intend to 
adore it. By the force of the act we become one 
with those in whose worship we join. We con- 
stitute with them and with the objects of their 
worship one communion]. 


E. Concluding admonition to live in such matters so as to profit one another, and to glorify God. 


Cuaprers X. 23.—XI. 1. 


23 


All things are lawful for me [om. for me],! but all things are not expedient; 


24 all things are lawful for me [om. for me],! but all things edify not. Let no man seek 
[that which is] his own, but every man’ [that which is] another’s wealth [om. 


25 wealth]. 


Whatsoever is sold in the shambles [meat-market], that eat, asking 


26 no questions for conscience’ sake: For the earth 7s the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof. 
27 If* any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatso- 


28 ever is set before you, eat, asking no questions for conscience’ sake. 


But if any man 


say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols [om. unto idols], eat not for his 


216 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








sake that shewed it, and for conscience’ sake: for the earth 7s the Lord’s, and the ful- 
29 ness thereof [om. for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof]: Conscience, I, 
say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man’s 
30 conscience? For [om. for] if I by grace be a partaker [if I partake with thankfulness 
εἰ ἐγῶ χάριτι μετέχω], why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? 
31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do [or do any thing, é¢re τὶ 
32 ποιῖετε], do all to the glory of Gud. Give none offence, neither to the Jews,’ nor to 
33 the Gentiles [Greeks, “EAAjow], nor to the church of God: Even as I please all men 
in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the projit of [the] many,’ that they may 


be saved. 
XI. 
1 Be ye followers [imitators, μίμηταί] of me, even as I also am of Christ. 


1 Ver. 23.—The Rec. has μοι after πάντα in each clause, but it is opposed by the best authorities, and was probabl 
taken from ch. yi. 12. [As the Apostle was here unquestionably repeating the same expression as was used in chap. yi. 1 
the internal evidence would seem to be in favor of μοι (Bloomfield, Rinck). But the documentary evidence in its favor (H. 
K.L Sin. (34 hand), the Syr. both, one copy of the Vulg., Chrys., Theodt., Orig., August. and some inferior MSS., which omit 
πάντα ἐξ. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ 7. οἰκοδ.) is too feeble, and that in opposition to it [A. B.C.(1st hand) D. Sin. (with Clem., Athan., Damase., 
Iren., ‘ert. and many others), too strong to warrant its insertion.—C. P. W.]. 

2 Ver. 24.—The Rec. also inserts ἕκαστος after τοῦ ἑτέρου. but it was perhaps borrowed from a similar passage in Phil. 
ii. 4. [It is not found in A. B. C. Ὁ. F. G. HL, Sin., six cursives, the Ital., Vulg., Copt., Sahid. and Arm. versions, and some 
Greek and Latin Fathers. Even Bloomfield, who at first defended it, now brackets it.—C. P. W.]. 

8 Ver. 27.—The δὲ is wanting after εἰ in some good manuscripts [ A. B. Ὁ, (1st hand) F. G. Sin., and some cursives, the Ital., 
Copt. and Vulg. versions, and Antioch., Chrys., Theodt., Aug., Ambrst.), and was probably, inserted because it was 
supposed to be needed asa connecting particle. [It is retained by Tisch. with C. D. (8d hand) E. H. K. L., some Sahid., Syr., Goth. 
versions, Theodt., Theophyl. and @cum., but it is cancelled by Lach., Alf., Mey., Stanl. and Wordsworth. D. HE. F. Οἱ, the 
Ital., Vulg. and Copt. versions, and Ambrst., Pelag. and Bede (not the Aug.) insert εἰς δεῖπνον after ἀπίστων.---Ο, P. W.). 

£ Ver, 28.—The Rec. has εἰδωλόθυτον, but it is probably a gloss which has been substituted in the text for the more un- 
common ἱερόθυτον. Neither word was common, but ἱερόθ. was of the classical, and εἰδολόθ. of the Hellenistic Greek (Bloom- 
field). The former had a neutral, and the latter a contemptuous signification (Stanley), and hence some have thought that 
no one would be likely to use the latter at the table of an unbeliever, unless, as Bloomfield suggests, by a weak fellow-Chiris- 
tian in an under tone, or aside. The former word is not too respectful for the Apostle to use, and it would imply nothing 
false. It is adopted by Griesb., Lachm., Tisch., Meyer, Alford and Stanley, on the authority of A. B. H. Sin., two cursives 
adduced by Bloomf.; the Sahid. version and some indirect testimonies produced by Tischendorf. Julian quotes Paul as 
using this word in this connection, and his opponent Cyril admits the same (Tisch.). The Latin versious of D. and F. use 
the word immolaticium, to which some Vulg. MSS. add zdolis, one (amiat.) has ¢mmolatium (2d cor. has immolativum) idolis, 
and the Vulg. (ed.) has immolatum idolis. The Rec. is favored by C. Ὁ. E. F.G. K. L., Chrys. and Theodt., and it is defended 
by Scholz. Reiche, Bloomfield and Wordsworth.—C. P. W.]. 

5 Ver. 28.—The Rec. after συνείδ. has τοῦ yap κυρίου ἡ γῆ καὶ τὸ πλήρωμα αὐτῆς, but these words are not found in the 
best MSS., and are a repetition of ver. 26. [They are left out in A. B.C. D. E. F. G. H. (1st hand), Sin., the Ital., Vulg., Copt., 
Syr., Sahid. and Arm. versions, and Damasc., August., Ambrst., Pelag. and Bede, and are retained in H. (2d hand) K. L., the 
Goth., Slay.,some Syr. and Arm. versions. and Chrys., Tkeodt., Phot., cum. and Theophyl.—C. P. W.). 4 

6 Ver. 30.—The Rec. after εἰ inserts δὲ, but it is feebly sustained. 

7 Ver. 32.—The Rec. has γίνεσθε καὶ ᾿Ιουδ.. but καὶ Ἰουδ. γίνεσθε, is better sustained by the MSS. [The latter has for it 
A. B. C. Sin., 17, 37, 73, Orig., Didym.. Cyr., while Ὁ. E. Κι. L. Sin. (8d hand), some cursives, and Chrys., Theodt. and Damasce. 
are in favor of the Recep —v. P. W.]. 

8 Ver. 33.—The Rec. has συμφέρον, but σύμφορον has better authority. fins former is more usual, and is sustained by 
D. E. F.G. K. 1, Sin. (3d hand), while the latter is sustained by A. B. C. Sin. Comp. on the same variation of reading in chap. 
vii. 35.—C. P. W.]. 


this limitation is more definitely expressed in 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 23, 24. He here anticipates an objection 
that might be raised against his previous injunc- 
tions on the score of Christian liberty, by point- 
ing out the ethical limitations which restrict that 
liberty. All things are in my power.— 
[This is the old statement made in vi. 12, setting 
forth the broad privileges of the Christian free- 
man, and to which the Apostle in a measure as- 
sents. |—But all things are not expedient. 
—This is the first limitation of expediency. But 
expedient for whom? The word συμφέρει 
might, in view of the previous warning, seem to 
imply ‘expedient for the subject himself.’ It 
were better, however, to take the word in its 
broadest application, ‘advantageous not only to 
the subject, but also to all others concerned.’— 
But all things edify not.—The second limi- 
tation; since it is the duty of every Christian 
to make edification a special object. In the 
verb ‘edify’ the reference to others is more fully 
brought out, and here it denotes the furtherance 
of the welfare of the Church.—In the next verse 


the form of a maxim inculcating the exercise of 
an unselfish love. It is a general truth which 
he by no means intends to limit simply to the 
case in hand.—Let no man seek his own 
(wealth), but (every man) that of an- 
other.—Here the negation is to be taken abso- 
lutely, and not relatively, as though it meant, 
‘seek not merely his own wealth, but also that of 
another.’ The ‘seeking of one’s own’ denotes 
the selfish attempt to make one’s own enjoyment, 
one’s own liberty, one’s own rights the sole 
paramount consideration, regardless of the good 
of others; and this falls under an absolute prohi- 
bition as being a violation of the great law of 
love. ‘*The idea here is, that even what 1s in- 
different in itself becomes sinful when ‘done to 
the prejudice of a neighbor.” NEANDER, 
From μηδείς we obtain for the nominative in the 
positive clause an éxacroc—a case of Zeugma. 
Like expressions occur in xiii, 5; Phil. 1]. 4, 
Rom. xv. 2f. 

Vers. 25. 26. First he asserts that the eating 
of flesh exposed for sale in the market, and this 
disconnected from idolatrous worship — even 


ἢ 


CHAP. X. 23-XI. 1. 





though it may have been cut from sacrificial 
victims, was altogether innocent, since this meat 
as well as the whole earth and all things in it 
belonged unto God.— Whatsoever is sold in 
the meat-market.—wpakéAdw, a word taken 
from the Latin and=xpewrwdiw. [The sale of 
the portion of the sacrificial meat, which fell to 
the priests, formed a part of their revenue, and 
was not to be distinguished from ordinary meat, ex- 
cept perhaps by its excellence, as the animals of- 
fered at the altar were usually of a superior kind. ] 
that eat, without special inquiry.—yydé 
avaxpivovrec, carefully searching nothing, i. e., as to 
whether it had been offered in sacrifice or not.— 
on account of conscience.—0dd τὴν συνείδη- 
ow. [What is this to be joined with? Some 
say the previous participle, as setting forth the 
particular point as to which the inquiry is made, 
and meaning ‘on the score of conscience;’ others 
connect it with the whole participial clause, as 
assigning the ground for not inquiring, being 
equivalent either to: ‘in order that your con- 
science may not be disturbed,’ or: ‘because your 
conscience being well informed as to the real 
nature of idols needs no inquiry’]; it had best 
however be joined with the whole previous sen- 
tence, and the meaning would then be: ‘eat 
without inquiry in order that the conscience be 
not burdened or troubled.’ [Such is the view 
of Meyer and Alford. Hodge gives another in- 
terpretation which he considers the simplest and 
most natural: “buy what you want and eat, 
making no matter of conscience in the thing. 
You need have no conscientious scruples, and, 
therefore, ask no question as to whether the meat 
had been offered to idols or not.’”-—By reason of 
what is said in ver. 28, one may be led to sup- 
pose that it was the conscience of an observer 
that was meant, which by that act might become 
disquieted or sullied, inasmuch as he too might 
be influenced through the example of one deemed 
stronger in the faith to eat likewise in spite of 
his scruples. [So De Wette, Bengel, Riickert]. 
And in justification of this, reference is made to 
ver. 29, where the conscience of another person 
is particularly specified. But the cases are not 
parallel; and in ver. 29, the reference to others 
is distinctly denoted through the preliminary 
clause in ver. 28, and there being no such re- 
ference here, it were far more natural to suppose 
the conscience of the inquirer to be intended.— 
The exhortation in our passage applies to all 
parties, especially to the weak, who would anx- 
iously ask about their duty in the premises. 
Yet it was also suited for the strong whose free- 
dom of opinion might suffer damage through the 
inquiry, since their conscience had been quick- 
ened by the Apostle’s instruction in reference to 
this whole matter.—The act of eating he justi- 
fies, by a citation from Ps. xxiv. 1, [‘* which 
was the common form of Jewish thanksgiving 
before the meal, and hence probably was the 
early Eucharistic blessing, and thus alluded to 
in this place.” Srantey].—for the earth is 
the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.—The 
word πλήρωμα denotes that with which a 
thing is filled, being passive, as everywhere in the 
New Testament. That which belongs to God 
cau never pollute, and His children need have no 
scruple about using and enjoying it freely. [And 














217 


this meat which had been offered to idols, was in 
fact no less His than any other meat: An idol 
being nothing could not vitiate it for its original 
use]. (Comp. on chap. viii. 6; 1 Tim. iv. 4; 
also Osiander in hoc loco, and the citations from 
Calvin and Melancthon by him).—Vy. 27-30: 
The same maxim is here applied to their conduct 
at a banquet given at a private house by a hea- 
then to which they might be invited.—If any 
of the unbelievers invite you.—The invi- 
tation here is not to a sacrificial feast, for in 
such a case the person would not need to be told 
whether the meat set before him had been offered 
to idols, [mor yet would it be allowable for a 
Christian to be present here].—and ye desire 
to go.—A slight hint that remaining away would 
be a little better; since heathenish customs were 
everywhere in vogue, and the temptation to deny 
their Master on the part of those not firmly 
established was very strong. He here has in 
view the more liberal-minded whose liberty he 
did not wish to retrench, and inasmuch as the 
case often involved the relations of family and 
friendship, by means of which the truth might 
be brought home to those who were still unbe- 
lievers. —whatsoever is set before you 
eat, asking no question on account of 
conscience.—See comments on ver. 25.—The 
case, however, is altered when the attention of 
the guest has been turned to the sacrificial cha- 
racter of the meat presented.—But if any man 
say unto you,—not the host, as is clear from 
the repetition of the τες, and from what is 
added further, which cannot in any case be re- 
ferred to an unbeliever. For the same reason, 
we cannot explain it, of a heathen fellow-guest 
who might indicate the fact to the Christian, 
either from love of mischief, or from a wish to 
test him, or even out of good-will. Only a 
Christian can here be meant, and that too some 
weak brother who has discovered the fact pointed 
out, and now warns his fellow-believer of it. 
‘“‘Not a Jewish Christian, since such a one would 
not ordinarily accept the invitation of a heathen; 
but some converted Gentile, infected with Jew- 
ish prejudices, who regarded idols as demoniac 
powers, and in partaking of the sacrificial flesh, 
felt himself brought into contact with them.” 
NEANDER. Even a weak brother might be sup- 
posed to partake of such a meal, being influenced 
by his particular relations, and yet with a deter- 
mination to refrain from every thing polluting. 
—This is offered in sacrifice.—icepéderov. 
and not εἱδωλόϑυτον, see critical notes. The 
former is a neutral word, and is used advisedly 
to represent what would be said at a heathen’s 
table; but the latter is a contemptuous expres- 
sion, which we could hardly suppose would be 
employed there.—eat not for his sake that 
shewed it, and for conscience’ sake.—The 
latter expression is explanatory of the former, 
and the connecting καί, and, specifies only the 
particular point to which the more general state- 
ment that precedes applies. If the informant 
were a heathen, then this expression, “for con- 
science’ sake,’’ would be unsuitable, or we should 
have to regard it as a second reason derived 
from the weaker brother, whose conscience we 
must suppose to be meant. Or we must take it 
to mean that the person must refrain from eating 


218 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE ΟΟΒΙΝΤΗΙΑΝΗ. 


---...-.:-ο-Φ-Φ------ —V—Ra——>d@>+@>C—Goi«Di>Gi_ a EY, 


in order not to allow the heathen informer to 
suppose that the participant still had to do with 
idols, and in order not to violate the conscience 
of weak Christians—obviously, a forced interpre- 
tation. [Evidently then it is some weaker bro- 
ther that is here meant, for whose sake it was 
duty to abstain. ‘‘The union of the most en- 
lightened liberality with the humblest conces- 
sion to the weakness of others here exhibited, 
may well excite the highest admiration. The 
most enlightened man of his whole generation 
was the most yielding and conciliatory in all 
matters of indifference.” Hopgr]. He next 
explains himself more fully, putting it beyond a 
doubt whose conscience is referred to.—Con- 
science I say, not thine own,—17p εαυτοῦ, 
t. e., of any one who may come into such circum- 
stances (not=77v oeavtov).—for why is my 
liberty judged of another’s conscience ? 
—This is not to be taken as expressing the defiant 
remonstrance of the liberal-minded to his weaker 
brother, who objected to be governed by his pre- 
judices. Such an interpretation would Be un- 
suitable both by reason of the ‘‘for,’’ which in 
this case would be inapposite, and also because 
the following exposition gives no reply to it. 
Several other interpretations here offer them- 
selves. Riickert and others think they find here 
a further reason for the command not to eat 
(ver. 28), taking the words to mean that the 
liberal-minded should not by eating give oc- 
casion for others to judge and blaspheme. But 
in this case they arbitrarily insert the thought, 
“‘to. give occasion,” and entirely pass over 
what precedes,*—To this there is joined an- 
other interpretation, which would find in this 
verse a vindication of the freedom of con- 
science, which the Apostle maintained in the 
name of the liberal-minded, g.d., ‘About one’s 
ewn conscience I am not now speaking; for it is 
altogether improper for my liberty to be judged 
by another’s conscience. If I am blamed for that 
which I for my part thankfully enjoy, so that by 
my thanksgiving such enjoyment is sanctified, 
this unfounded condemnation neither violates 
nor endangers my own conscience; so that in not 
eating, my concern is chiefly for the conscience 
of another—some weak brother which ought to 
be spared, and not mine own.’ [This is Meyer’s 
explanation, who finds here the reason asserted 
why Paul did not mean the person’s own con- 
science, for the sake of sparing which he enjoined 
abstinence from eating in the case mentioned in 
ver. 28, but the conscience of another. The 
man’s own conscience, he says, did not need such 
consideration, for it is not affected by another’s 
judging and blaspheming, since both are ground- 





* (Kling here hardly does justice to the interpretation he 
so summarily sets aside, and which is advocated by Chrys. 
and the Greek commentators, Heyd., Billr., Olsh., Neand., 
Hodge, Stanley, and many others. This takes κρίνεται 
for κατακρίνεται, in the sense of condemn, and finds here a 
valid reason for enjoining the liberal-minded brother not to 
eat against the convictions and prejudices of the weaker 
one, who has pointed out to him the objectionable meat. 
The reason is that there is no propriety in doing that which 
seems censurable to another, and gives occasion for observers 
to blaspheme, even though it may be right in our own esteem, 
and accompanied with thanksgiving to God. “This.” as 
Hodge well says, “brings the passage into harmony with 
the whole context, and connects it with the main idea of 
the previous verse, and not with an intermediate and subor- 
dinate clause’’]. 








less. The reason therefore for abstaining, could 
only be found in the conscience of another, and 
not in the danger done to one’s own conscience; 
and this also is Bengel’s view ].—The iva rim 
iva τί γένηται, in order that what may hap- 
pen?—why ? a form for introducing a question 
about something which has no object or ground, 
as here, and the verb ‘judge’ (κρίνειεν) here 
denotes a disapproving, condemning judgment, 
as is seen in the parallel verb, βλασφήμειν, in the 
next clause.—If I with grace do partake.— 
Here χάριτι corresponds to εὐχαριστῶ in what 
follows, and is not to be understood of the good- 
ness of God, which allows of such participation, 
or gives me the light which liberalizes my spirit, 
aud hence is not. to be translated ‘through grace’ 
[or ‘by grace,’ as the E. V. has it], but it means, 
with thanks, referring to the Eucharistic blessing . 
which accompanied the social meal, as may be 
seen in the expression still common in many 
places—‘‘to say grace.” As the object of the 
verb ‘partake,’ we are to supply ‘meat and 
drink.’—why am I evil spoken of respect- 
ing that for which I give thanks?—£ Aac- 
φήμειν, lit., to blaspheme, a sharp word, de- 
noting the bitter condemnation pronounced on 
the liberal-minded, as on one false to his princi- 
ples. In the use of it there lies a sharp rebuke 
of the lack of love exhibited by the person 
judging (comp. Rom. xy. 3; xiv. 16). 

Ver. 81—Chap. xi. 1. His exhortation here 
turns to the Church in general, describing the 
end and aim which should control the entire 
conduct of every Christian. And this he con- 
nects directly with the last word in the previous 
verse, εὐχαριστεῖν", which denotes an ascription of 
honor to God.—Therefore,—g. d., ‘in like man- 
ner, as ye thank God for your nourishment, so 
in all your eating and drinking,’ eie. Or if this 
mode of connection does not satisfy, we may 
take the ‘therefore’ to indicate the logical infe- 
rence of a general truth from the special one, 
— whether ye eat, whether ye drink, 
whether any thing ye do.—The first toveire 
may be taken either as generic, including 
under itself also the eating and drinking, or, it 
may be taken as expressing action, in contrast 
to. enjoyment. In the first case, the emphasis 
would lie upon rz, as equivalent to ὁτεοῦν, 
whatsoever ; in the second, it would lie upon the. 
verb,—but this is hardly to be preferred, [though 
Alford does prefer it]. In like manner, Col. ili. 
17. ‘*From what has been said, Paul here de- 
duces a general didactic inference; he exhorts 
them so to adjust and use every thing, however 
indifferent, that God’s name may be hallowed.” 
NEANDER.—Do all to the glory of God.— 
[‘‘ This may mean either, ‘Do all things with a 
view to the glory of God;’ Let that be the ob- 
ject constantly aimed at; or, ‘Do all things in 
such a way that God may be glorified.’ There 
is little difference between these modes of expla- 
nation. God cannot be glorified by our conduct, 
unless it be our object to act for His glory. The 
latter interpretation is favored by a comparison 
with 1 Pet. iv. 11, ‘‘ That God in all things may 
be glorified.” See Col. iii. 17, all the special 
directions given inthe preceding discussion are 
here summed up. ‘Let self be forgotten. Let 
your eye be fixed on God. Let the promotion of 


CHAP. X. 23-XI. 1. 


219 


—_——.-_ SO SI SIS 


His glory be your object inall ye do. Strive in 
every thing to act in such a way that men may 
praise that God whom you profess to serve.’ 
Hover]. This thought is further expanded ne- 
gatively.—_Give none offence, neither to 
Jews, nor to Greeks, nor to the church 
of God.—He here specially addresses the libe- 
ral-minded, as in v. 31, who by the reckless use 
of their liberty were putting a stumbling-block 
as well in the way of the Jews to whom every 
approach to heathenism was an abomination, as 
in the way of the heathen who beheld in their 
lax conduct a want of fidelity to a religion which 
professed to separate itself so strictly from hea- 
thenism, and would become disgusted at the 
divisions thus created among Christians; and 
also in the way of the Church of God,- both at 
Corinth and elsewhere, which would feel injured 
by conduct so ambiguous and so prejudicial to 
its unity. And while thus the recognition of 
,the true God in Christ would be obstructed both 
among Jews and Gentiles, and the Church would 
be hindered in its happy success, the result 
would be, in its final bearings, dishonorable to 
the glory of God. The regard here paid to 
Jews and heathen, should not so surprise us, as 
to force us to the supposition that Jewish and 
heathen converts were meant; for in chap, ix. 
20 also, we find the Apostle laying just as great 
a stress on the duty of taking pains to win both. 
—tThis exhortation he finally strengthens by a 
reference to his own example.—BEven as I 
please all, in all things.—Comp. chap. ix. 
19 ff.—rdvra, the accusative of more exact de- 
finition. The verb ‘please,’ as in Rom. xv. 2, 
means to seek to please, try to prove acceptable 
to, and is to be taken in a good sense, as the 
subsequent explanations show. It is. otherwise 
in Gal. i. 10.—Not seeking,—[u7 ζητῶν, the 
use of the subjunctive negative here, shows the 
implication of a particular affection, which he as- 
cribes to himself, and brings into the supposition, 
4. d., ‘as one who, as far as I can, am seeking,’ 
see Winer, p. IIIL., 2 55, 5, 13],—mine own 
profit, but that of the many.—Here he puts 
in contrast over against his own single self, the 
vast multitude (as in Rom. vy. 15) whose interests 
were the object of his pure and affectionate 
endeavor. Their profit which he sought, was 
the highest conceivable,—that they might be 
saved.—Comp. ix. 22; i. 18.—Assured of this 
his purpose, he urges them to imitate his exam- 
ple (comp. iv. 16) even as he himself imitated 
the example of Christ, in the exercise of a love 
which renounced all selfish interests.-Be ye imi- 
tators of me, as I also am of Christ.—“‘ Only 
in so far should they imitate him, as he set forth 
the image of Christ. Of course the whole pic- 
ture of Christ’s life stood before the eyes of the 
Apostle. But then Paul must have had a histo- 
rical portrait of the acts and sufferings of Christ, 
just as it is exhibited in the traces sketched by 
the Evangelists, and in this we have an argu- 
ment against the mythical view of the life of 
Christ.”” NEANDER. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The Christian’s inheritance in this earth, and 
the duties consequent upon it. 











“The earth is the 


Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.”” In this one 
sentence there is opened to the Christian an in- 
exhaustible wealth of joy and satisfaction, as 
well as a wide sphere of sacred obligations. If 
the earth, with all that fills and adorns it, be- 
longs to the Lord, because it is His work, then in 
every earthly good which nourishes and quickens. 
him, which strengthens and delights him, ought. 
the Christian to taste the favor and the goodness: 
of his God (Ps. exxxvi. 1; xxxiv. 8), to perceive: 
His power and glory, and to receive it all as the: 
gift of His love. In all his observations and re- 
searches, he ought to mark the footsteps of the: 
Divine wisdom and greatness; of the Divine- 
faithfulness and care for His creatures, and. 
above all, for His human creatures made in His; 
own image. Wherever he turns, the thoughts; 
of God which are expressed in the manifold pro-- 
ductions of earth, will reveal themselves to his: 
thought. The earth itself, with all its rich and. 
varied life, will become to him a manifestation: 
of the Divine glory and grace; and the more he- 
searches, the more clearly will this open before: 
him. Thus he acquires a large open heart, andi 
becomes ever more capable of enjoyment. Every 
thing narrow and contracted about him will drop, 
away by degrees. What once seemed strange: 
and mysterious will become known and familiar;. 
he will be able to rejoice in it, freed from all: 
anxious thoughts.—Such results are, however, 
conditioned on the fact that he walks as in the- 
presence of God, that the earth appears to him. 
as a sanctuary, where he ventures to tread, only 
after he has taken off his shoes, ὃ. e., only after 
he has divested himself of the commonness of his. 
earthly sense, of vain and proud thoughts, of 
selfish and interested projects and endeavors,, 
and after he has become collected in spirit; so» 
that out from the midst of all the manifold pheno- 
mena around him, the one Divine ground and 
aim had in them, the Divine idea in forming, and 
so richly unfolding itself therein, shall shine out 
upon his spirit. His God, who furnishes him 
all this fulness for his use and enjoyment, for 
his study and comprehension, has by this means. 
put him under obligations also, 7. ¢., inwardly 
bound him to Himself, so that he shall be depen- 
dent on Him, as on the One who is the ground and 
goal of all things; so that all participation and 
all joy of discovery shall issue in thanksgiving 
and praise to His great and good name, and so 
that he, as the priest of God, shall conduct His 
creatures to Him in an intelligent, susceptible, 
and worshipful spirit, moulding and fashioning: 
them out of his own spirit, in,such a way as to: 
awaken in them Divine thoughts and endeavors, 
and to cause the natural to wear the impress: 
more and more of the spiritual. In this is in-- 
cluded a tender, delicate, gracious treatment of 
all creatures, and also a temperance and modesty 
in their use, to the exclusion alike of all conduct. 
that is crude, severe, arbitrary, reckless and ex- 
cessive; and of allmismanagementas well through 
unmercifulness, as through foolish fondling and 
petting.—Cf. Scriver: —GortuHoup’s: ‘Four 
hundred occasional prayers;’’ PauL GERHARD’s: 
“Go forth, my heart, and seek my joy,” etc.; and 
much in J. Bohme, Oetinger, Herder, Schubert,, 
etc. 

2. The success, perfection and development of the 


220 





church of Christ is conditioned on the prevatling 
power of righteousness, which, on the one hand, 
takes account of the weakness of unconfirmed 
and scrupulous natures in considerate, tolerant 
self-denying love, honors the severity of ear- 
nest Christians even though oftentimes abrupt 
and inordinate, and presents an offering of self- 
denial to one another with perfect willingness; 
yet, onthe other, injures in no respect the right of 
evangelical liberty, but avows it and maintains 
it, and, with all readiness to deny itself of this 
and that, in order to give no occasion of offence, 
also insists upon the fact that the conscience of 
a person living in faith is not dependent upon 
the scruples, and narrow thoughts and judg- 
ments of another, but, on the contrary, stands 
free and far above them, inviolable, in untrou- 
bled calmness and clearness. It is thus that a 
true advance can be made towards the sound ex- 
pansion and ‘softening of a narrow and stringent 
mode of thought, as well as towards the healthy 
restriction of that which is broad and free; and 
thus the glory of God be promoted and strength- 
ened in His Church. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke:—Ver. 33 (Spener). A God-loving 
Christian willingly refrains from needlessly do- 
ing anything which may awaken doubts as to its 
propriety. It is not enough to have truth in 
view, and according to this our rights, and ac- 
cording to our rights our liberty; but the rules 
of Christian prudence and moderation, directed 
to general edification, require compliance with 
love, that true mistress, which, though it often 
yields its rights, never loses its good conscience. 
—Ver. 24. Since self-love has become so far cor- 
rupt as to lift us not only above our neighbor, 
but also above God, self-denial has come to be 
the first rule of Christianity, in order that our 
love may be properly balanced; since there is no 
danger of our ever absolutely forgetting self. 
Indeed, the equity of love demands that we, in 
many circumstances, prefer our neighbor to self, 
i. 6., the profit of his soul to our own bodily con- 
venience.—(Hed.) “Τοῦ every one seek what is 
another’s’’—so, in fact, selfishness and avaricesay, 
t.¢., ‘*take, rob, get by fraud what is another’s.”’ 
But mark what is added: ‘Let no one seek his 
own.”’—Ver. 25. The Christian is free to eat 
everything, provided no offence is given to his 
neighbor. Useless inquiries and curious subtle- 
ties awaken many scruples. Against all such, 
‘simple-mindedness is a sure antidote.—Ver. 26 
(Luther). Christ is Lord, and free, and so are 
‘Christians, in all things. —Oh, man, thou art not 
lord-proprietor, but only steward in God’s do- 
main! What a rich Father we have if we are 
‘God’s children.—Ver, 29 (Luther). My conscience 
shall remain unbound, though I outwardly com- 
ply with my neighbor for his good. We may eat 
what we will, provided we have it righteously, 
take it as a gift from God, and receive it with 
thanksgiving.—Ver. 31. All acts, however small, 
are sanctified and ennobled by a single reference 
to the glory of God; and this is promoted, when 
‘we do that which accords with a well ordered love 
‘toward ourselves and our neighbor, and abstain 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Believers ought to walk unreprovably, not only 
among brethren, but also among unbelievers and 
hypocrites, in order that such may find no occa- 
sion for blaspheming Christian doctrine.—All 
have one common Father; we ought, therefore, 
to be serviceable to one as well as to another.— 
Ver. 38. Ministers should be an example to their 
hearers, in order that they may not retract with 
the left what they give with the right.— xi. 1. 
Christ is the perfect pattern of a holy life, who, 
for our sakes, renounced all comfort and personal 
convenience. ‘To follow in His steps is the pre- 
éminent token of a true minister. Such imita- 
tion is possible through the privilege we have of 
drawing from His fulness (John i. 16). 
BeRLENB. BisLE:—Ver. 23. A soul truly eman- 
cipated may, by reason of its innocence and sim- 
plicity, do much which is not only not displeas- 
ing, but even acceptable to God; nevertheless, it 
may not be always advisable to do it. Love must 
be the standard in all things.—Ver. 24. Let none 
say, ‘why must I consult for another? Why must 
he be so weak?’ Wherefore, then, didst thou 
wish to become a member of the Church if thou 
art unwilling to inquire after its members ?— 
In this way thou severest thyself from the Head. 
—Ver. 25. We must deal very tenderly with the 
conscience on account of our corrupt state. 
Many are scrupulous where they might be un- 
hesitating, and reckless where they ought to be 
careful.—Ver. 26. What the earth produces is 
good; the great point is, how is it used ?—Ver. 
27. The liberty which Christ has earned for us 
should be guarded as a priceless jewel, that 
Christ may have His own.—Ver. 28 ff. A person 
may possess something and yet refrain from its 
use, preserving his liberty intact.—Ver. 31. A 
Christian must order his entire life, so as to ren- 
der it a perpetual God-service. Even our call- 
ing is a service of God; therefore refrain not 
from it. If with singleness of purpose thou dost 
consecrate all thy labor to God, then does it be- 
come a divine service. This rule put in exer- 
cise, sanctifies everything, even our natural 
work; and converts every meal into a sort of 
sacrament, so that it, in its own way, as if an 
acted prayer, shall receive its reward. By this 
means our most general works are hallowed, and 
without this our costliest works are punishable. 
Such searching method in the service of the 
Spirit many call legal. But it is the right me- 
thod of faith, whereby the Son makes us free from 
the law of sin anddeath. The believer does, ac- 
cording to the spirit, nothing but good so far as 


he is a believer; he pleases God in all things by 


virtue of the divine life in him, which he has by 
faith. His doing, thinking, speaking, all tran- 
spires in God and before God.—Ver. 32. If a 
person desire to honor God, and yet set his 
neighbor aside, his eye would be playing the 
rogue. Be void of offence !—Chap. xi. 1. Christ’s 
example is both a gift and an influence. If we 
put on His example, His Spirit, His compassion, 
He makes out everything which can happen in 
our outer and inner life. He is the original, ac- 
cording to which all must be fashioned. The 
Apostles, indeed, referred to themselves; but they 
had a good conscience. 

Riecer :—Chap. xi. 1. Christ is certainly the 


from whatever desegrates God’s name.—Ver. 82. | most perfect example; yet, since it is difficult for 


CHAP. X. 


us, in all οὐ -.aried circumstances, always to 
track His footrteps, the types of Christ seen in 
the Old Testament, and the patterns after Him 
found in the New Testament, serve to present to 
us His mind in a form adapted to our every day 
conditions. 

Bencet:—Ver. 30. Giving thanks at meals 
sanctifies all food, denies the authority of idols, 
and acknowledges that of God. 

Hevusner:—Ver. 24. The Christian pays a 
tender regard to the conscience of others, with- 
out proudly asserting his own rights, and with- 
out loftinegs of spirit.—Ver. 29. In doubtful cases, 
do not insist upon another’s deciding according 
to your ov/n conscience.—Ver. 80. Since a thank- 
ful spirit sanctifies every enjoyment, all that 
thou canst, with a clear conscience, give thanks 
for and ask a blessing on, is allowable.—Ver. 
81. Also in the society of the unholy oughta 
Christian to keep in view his highest aim, 7. e., 
to glorify God by his life; hence he should join 
in nothing that dishonors God.—Ver. 32. By 
carefully avoiding offences, a Christian should 
preserve his own honor and that of his Church. 
The immoralities of professing converts may 
prove a cause of stumbling even to unbelievers. 
—Ver. 33. The Christian’s pleasing is a holy 
pleasing. It aims notat his own enjoyment, but 
at the spiritual good of others; it proposes to 
win them, and the agreeable exterior is designed 
to open a way to the interior—the sanctuary 
within.—Chap. xi. 1. Christ has taken care to 
provide for us a multitude of examples, in order 
to show us that we likewise may follow Him. 

W. F. Besser :—Ver. 24. Liberty is given thee 
in all sorts of things, not to use them for thine 
own sake at pleasure, but rather to serve thy 
neighbor therewith, and to seek his prosperity. — 
Ver. 25. There isa hunting after conscientious 
scruples, in which many persons carry out their 
whole Christianity, ending, alas! oftentimes, in 
straining out gnats and swallowing camels. 

[A. Futter :—Ver. 33. Paul pleased men in 
all things, and yet he says, if I pleased men I 
should not be the servant of Christ, Gal. i. 10. 
From the context in the former case, it appears 
plain that the things in which the Apostle 
pleased all men require to be restricted to such 
things as tend to their “ profit, that they may be 
saved.”’ Whereas the things in which, accord- 
ing to the latter passage, he could not please 
men, and “yet be the servant of Christ,” were 
of a contrary tendency. Such were the objects 
pursued by the false teachers whom he opposed, 
and who desired to make a fair show in the 
flesh, lest they should suffer persecution for the 
cross of Christ, chap. vi. 12. The former is that 
sweet inoffensiveness of spirit which teaches us 
to lay aside all self-will and self-importance, that 
charity which ‘‘seeketh not her own,” and ‘is 
not easily provoked ;” it is that spirit, in short, 





23-XI. 1. 221 





which the same writer elsewhere recommends for 
the example of Christ Himself: ‘We, then, wha 
are strong, ought to bear the infirmities of the 
weak, and not to please ourselves.—Let every 
one of us please his neighbor for his good to edi- 
fication; for even Christ pleased not Himself; 
but as it is written, ‘‘ The reproaches of them that 
reproached thee fell on me.”—But the latter 
spirit referred to is that sordid compliance with 
the corruptions of human nature, of which flat- 
terers and deceivers have always availed them- 
selves, not for the glory of God or the good of 
men, but for the promotion of their own selfish 
designs ]. 

[Μ. Henry :—Ver. 23. They who allow them- 
selves in everything not plainly sinful in itself, 
will often run into what is evil by accident, and 
do much mischiefto others. Circumstances may 
make that a sin, which in itself is none.—Ver. 
27. Christianity does by no means bind us up 
from the common offices of humanity, or allow us 
an uncourteous behaviour to any of our own kind, 
however they may differ from us in religious 
sentiments or practices.—Ver. 33. A preacher 
may press his advice home with boldness and 
authority, when he can enforce it with his own 
example. He is most likely to promote a pub- 
lic spirit in others, who can give evidence of it 
in himself. And it is highly commendable in a 
minister to neglect his own advantages, that he 
may promote the salvation of his hearers. This 
shows that he has a spirit suitable to his func- 
tion. Itis a station for public usefulness, and 
can never be faithfully discharged by a man of 
a narrow spirit and selfish principles]. 

[F. W. Ropertson:—Ver. 29. The duty of at- 
tending to appearances.—Now we may think thig 
time-serving; but the motive made all the differ- 
ence: ‘*Conscience, I say, not thine own, but 
of the other.” Study appearances, therefore, 
so far as they are likely to be injurious to others. 
Here, then, is the principle and the rule; we 
cannot live in this world indifferent to appear- 
ances. Year by year we are more and more 
taught this truth. It is irksome, no doubt, to be 
under restraint, to have to ask not only, ‘‘Does 
God permit this?” but, ‘‘ Will it not be miscon- 
strued by others?” and to a free, open, fiery 
spirit, such as the Apostle of the Gentiles, doub- 
ly irksome, and almost intolerable. Neverthe- 
less, it was to him a most solemn consideration: 
Why should I make my goodness and my right 
the occasion of blasphemy? ‘Truly, then, and 
boldly, and not carelessly, he determined to give 
no offence to Jews or Gentiles, or to the Church 
of God, but to please all men. And the measure 
or restraint of this resolution was, that in car- 
rying it into practice he would seek not his own 
profit, but the profit of many, that they might be 
saved]. 


222 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 











XV. 


APOSTOLIC INSTRUCTIONS IN RELATION TO THE CONDUCT BECOMING CHURCH 
ASSEMBLIES. 


CHAPTER XI. 2-34. 


A. In respect of apparel; in the covering of the head by the women, and the uncovering of it by the men 
(Chap. xi. 2-16). 


2 Now [But, 62] I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep 
[firmly hold, xar¢yere] the ordinances [traditions, παραδόσεις], as I delivered them to 

3 you. But I would have you [I wish you to, ϑέλω] know, that the head of every man 
-is Christ; and the head of the [om. the] woman 7s the man; and the head of Christ 

4 is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having Ais head covered [anything 
5 down, depending from his head, χατὰ χεφαλῆς ἔχων], dishonoureth his head. But 
every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth 

6 her [own, ἑαυτῆς] head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the 
woman be not covered, let her also be shorn [let her hair be cut off, χειράσθω]: but 

7 if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, Jet her be covered. For a man 
indeed ought not to cover Ais head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: 

8 but the woman is the glory of the [om. the] man. For the [om. the] man is not 
[out] of the [om. the] woman; but the [om. the] woman [out] of the [om. the] man. 

9 Neither was the man [For man was not] created for the woman; but the [om. the] 
10 woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head 
11 because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither 
the woman without the man [neither is woman without man, nor man without woman], 

12 in the Lord. For as the woman 18 [out] of the man, even so 7s the man also by 
13 [means of] the woman; but all things of [are from, éx] God. Judge in yourselves 
[among your own selves, ἐν ὁμῖν αὐτοῖς}: is it comely that a woman pray unto God un- 

14 covered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a 
15 shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair 
16 is given her for a covering [an envelopment, περιβολαίου]. But if any man seem to be 
contentious, we have no such [established, συνήθειαν] custom, neither the churches of 


God. 


1 Ver. 2.—In many good M&S, efc., ἀδελφοί is found after ὑμᾶς, but itis doubtful; itis notin A.B C. [Sinait.,4 cur 
sives, the Copt., Sahid., Athan. (Romaned.), Arm., Athan., Cyr., Bas., Chrys.]. Its insertion would have been very natural. If 
this verse were the beginning of a new section, transcribers and commentators would have expected the word, and if it had 
been in the original, it would not have been easily omitted. It is found in D. E. F. G. Κι. L., et al., the Ital., Vulg , Goth., 
Syr. (which, with some others, adds μου), Athan., Theodt., Damasc., Ambrst., Rel. Lachm., Alford, Stanley and Wordsw. 
cancel it, while Bloomf. and Tisch. (after cancelling it in his 3d edit.) insert it—C. P. W.]. : 

2 Ver. 3.—The article τοῦ before Χριστοῦ is not very certain. [Lachm., Tisch. and Alford admit it on the authority of 
A.B. D. Sin. and some Fathers. Bloomfield suggests that in these MSS, “ the word, written abbreviatim, may have arisen 
from the preceding δὲ. It may, however, have been removed to match the absence of the article before yuvaixds.— 
CrP. Walk 

8 vet 5.—Lachm. has adopted αὐτῆς on very considerable authority [A. C. D. (1st cor.) F. G. L. Sinait., and about a 
dozen cursives, with Chrys., Theodt., ef al.]. This form might have arisen from an attempt to make it conform to the 
αὐτοῦ of ver. 4. {Bloomfield thinks the true word may have been αὑτῆς, which in Hellenistic Greek was often equivalent to 
εαυτῆς (Fritzsche). Tischendorf, in his early edit., had αὐτῆς, but in his 3rd, and later, he has ἑαυτῆς. The latter word 
would have been needful, ifthe Apostle had wished to prevent his readers from confounding {πὸ κεφαλὴν with ὁ ἀνήρ, as 
they would have been likely to do after what he had said in ver. 3.—C, P. W.]. 

4 Ver.7.—The Rec. omits ἡ before γυνή, but the authority for the article is very strong. It was removed so that the 
hrase might conform with similar preceding and following phrases. [A. B. D.(1st cor.) F. G. Sinait. (8d cor.) 73, 118, Dial. 
sador., Theodt. insert it. So Lachm., Tisch., Alford, Meyer and Stanley. Bloomfield receives it, but expresses it in. small 

print. It seems required in the same sense as in ver. 10, where it is certainly genuine.—C. P. W.]. 

5 Ver. 11.—The Rec. has an inverted order for these words, but it is not well sustained. Meyer thinks that it was more 
natural to mention the man first, and that this occasioned the change. ee Tisch., Bloomfield and Alford, with A. 
B.C. D. (1st and 3d cor.) BE. F. G. H. and Sinait., with several cursives, versions and Fathers, have γυνὴ χωρίς ἀνδρὸς οὔτε 
ἀνὴρ. χωρὶς yuvaixos.—C. P. W.]. , 

δ Ver. 14.—The Rec. has ἣ οὐδὲ αὐτή φύσις, but in oppusition to decisive authorities. The ἢ was an addition to deter- 
mine the connection with ver.13. [It is wanting in A. B. ©. Ὁ. (1st cor.) F. G. H. Sinait., et al. Ital., Vulg., Copt., Syr., 
Arm., Tert., Ambr., Ambrst., and has been suspected to be an attempt to point the interrogation. F.G. Arm., Tert., have 7 
φύσις without the αὐτή, but against better authorities; but many of the best MSS put αὐτή after φύσις.---Ο. P. W.]. 

T Ver. 15.—Lachmann, with the Rec., adds airy after δέδοται, on some good but not sufficiert manuscripts. It is easy 
to see how it may have been added. [A. B. Sinait., et al., have δέδοται αὐτῇ ; C. H., with some cursives, the Vulg. and Syr. 
versions, and Damasc. and Ambr, have αὐτῇ δέδοται" and Ὁ. E. F. G@. K. L., and many others, with Chrys., Theodt., Zcum. 
and Tert. entirely omit air7.—O. Ρ W.]. 


CHAP. XI. 2-16. 





EXEGETICAL AND ORITICAL. 


[‘‘ Having corrected the more private abuses 
that prevailed among the Corinthians, the Apos- 
tle begins in this chapter to consider those which 
relate to the mode of conducting public worship. 
The first of these is the habit of women appear- 
ing in public without a veil. Dress is in a great 
degree conventional. A costume which would be 
proper in our country, would be indecorous in an- 
other. The principle insisted upon in this para- 
graph is, that women should conform in matters 
of dress to all those usages which the public 
sentiment of the community in which they live 
demands. The veil in all eastern countries was, 
and to a great extent still is, the symbol of mo- 
desty and subjection. For a woman, therefore, 
in Corinth to discard the veil, was to renounce 
her claim to modesty, and to refuse to recognize 
her subordination to her husband. It is on the 
assumption of this significancy in the use of the 
veil that the Apostle’s whole argument in this 
paragraph is founded.” Hopes. ] 

Ver. 2. He begins the new lesson he was about 
to impart with a conciliatory introduction.— 
Now I praise you.—This might be attached 
directly to the previous injunction ‘‘be ye fol- 
lowers of me,” just as what follows might be 
subsumed under the one in the 82d verse, ‘give 
none offence,” although neither of these connec- 
tions is by any means certain. At any rate the 
first clause is not to be taken in the way of a 
strong contrast with what precedes [taking the 
δέ in an adversative instead of transitional 
sense], g. d., ‘though I exhort you to imitate 
me, yet, nevertheless, I praise you.’ [Hodge is 
inclined to adopt this method of interpreting the 
connection, andadds: ‘the Corinthians, although 
backward in following the self-denying and con- 
ciliatory conduct of the Apostle, were, never- 
theless, in general mindful of the ordinances or 
rules which he had delivered to them.’ ]|—That 
ye remember me in all things.—The ov is 
not dependent on πάντα, so that the latter be- 
comes the direct object of μέμνησϑε, making 
the rendering (that ye remember all things which 
proceed from me). Such construction were in- 
admissible, if for no other reason but this, that 
the verb μιμνήσκειν in the New Testament never 
takes the accusative.—This remembrance he de- 
signates as one that proved itself in worthy 
deeds.—That ye keep the traditions even 
as I delivered (them) to you.—The personal 
and the official characters are here inseparably 
united. The traditions (παρα δόσεις) he here 
speaks of, were both of an oral and written kind 
(2 Thes. 11, 15), and embraced doctrinal, as well 
as ritual and practical matters. Here, indeed, 
he refers primarily to such instructions and or- 
dinances as concerned the order of the church, 
and of divine worship. The dispute respecting 
Scripture and tradition obtains no hold here, in- 
asmuch as the distinction between that which 
was fixed in writing, and that not so fixed did 
not asyet appear. [‘‘ The word translated ‘tra- 











228 


it is always in reference to what is human and 
untrustworthy, Gal. i. 14; Col. ii. 8, and fre- 
quently in the gospels of the traditions of the 
elders.” Hopax.] That the particular point 
alluded to cannot be that mentioned in ver. 3 ff. 
(Olsh.), is plain from the formula of introduction 
there used which hints at something new (comp. 
Osiander). κατεχέιν, to hold fast, so as to submit 
to it as authority, and to conduct one’s self ac- 
cordingly (Meyer: by faith and obedience ; Osi- 
ander: usu tenere), 

Ver. 3. But I wish you to know that 
the head of every man is Christ.—He here 
assigns the doctrinal ground for the practical 
instruction which follows. ‘In the Corinthian 
Church there was a departure from the prevail- 
ing custom of the East (according to which wo- 
men went veiled), especially on the part of hea- 
then converts, who, even in other respects, 
rather overstretched the idea of Christian liberty. 
Since Paul is here discussing a question of merely 
outward custom, it is interesting to ebserve how 
characteristically he surveys the smallest matters 
in connection with the greatest, and understands 
how to penetrate to the remotest particulars from 
the fundamental principles of the Christian life. 
He begins, not with the custom itself, but with 
the leading idea that ought to govern it.” Nu- 
ANDER. By the opening words of the verse he 
indicates the importance of the instruction he is 
about to communicate. What he particularly in- 
culcates, is the subordination of woman to the 
man; but this he directly connects with higher © 
relations. Before he declares the relation which 
the wife sustains to the husband as her head, 
he points to that which the man sustains to 
Christ as his Head, and concludes with referring 
all back to God as the Head of Christ. By the 
term head he expresses the next immediate rela- 
tion sustained. The man, that is the Christian 
man, has Christ for his Head to whom he is alone 
subordinate, while the woman who, as a member 
of the Church, has indeed Christ in like manner 
for her Head, is yet primarily subject to her 
husband, and in him has her support, her des- 
tiny, and her dignity.—To extend this relation 
to men generally, is opposed by the fact that the 
Apostle is here addressing the Christian Church. 
Nor yet is he indicating the relation of the two 
sexes in general, but only as it is definitely rea- 
lized in marriage. But even here we are to dis- 
tinguish between the inner life of faith, or in 
other words, the personal relation to Christ 
where all other distinctions are entirely swal- 
lowed up and lost (Gal. iii. 28), and the social 
position held in the family and in the church 
where the wife is dependent on the man, is re- 
presented by him, and put under his care. Never- 
theless. it must be remembered that this power 
and dignity of the husband is founded on the 
position he holds toward Christ as his Head, and 
so the dependence of the wife on him appears as 
a mediated dependence on Christ.—And the 
head of Christ is God.—Compare the re- 
marks on iii. 23; viii. 6. Although the economic 
relation is primarily meant, wherein Christ even 


ditions’ is never used in the New Testament in| in His exaltation is dependent on God (xv. 28; 


reference to the rule of faith, except for the im- 
mediate instructions of inspired men. When 
used in the modern sense of the word tradition, 


Col. i. 15; Eph. iii. 9); yet this dependence pre- 
supposes a sort of dependence also in the imma- 
nent relations of the Trinity, which, however, 


224 





is perfectly consistent with essential equality 
of being.—[Here, then, we have a view of the 
unity of the heavenly kingdom in its gradual 
subordination to the Supreme Authority—God— 
Christ—Man— Woman. The dependence and 
submission is one of love yielding to the divinely 
appointed guardianship and control; the autho- 
rity is that of love exercised in wisdom, and di- 
rected towards the good of the lowest and the 
glory of the highest. These are the conditions 
of the divine order in which the relations sus- 
tained between the parties are typical of each 
other. And on this fact is the argument of the 
Apostle founded. As God is the head of Christ, 
and as Christ is the head of the Church, so is 
the man the head of the woman. For a fuller 
development of this analogy see Eph. ν. 23-33. 
Let it be here understood that the subordination 
thus expressed involves no degradation. As the 
Church is not dishonored by being subject to 
Christ, so neither is woman dishonored by being 
subject to man]. 

Ver. 4. From the doctrine established in ver. 
8, he first draws an inference for the man in the 
matter of his apparel while at Church.—Every 
man praying or prophesying,—. e., speak- 
ing in public. And by the former is meant, not 
exactly the speaking with tongues which cer- 
tainly occurred while in prayer, but the simple 
offering of supplication in general; by the latter, 
such a discourse as set forth the mysteries of 
the divine counsels or of the human life, under 
a divine inspiration. (Comp. xiii. 2; xiv. 24ff.). 
These were the two main parts of primitive 
Christian worship. In the first the speaker is 
the organ of the congregation presenting itself 
before God in thanksgiving, petition, and inter- 
cession; in the second, the organ of the Divine 
Spirit communicating His lessons to the Church. 
—Having his head covered.—xard κεφαλῆς 
ἔχων, here τὲ is understood—lit. ‘having aught 
upon his head.’ According to the usage of the 
Greeks,men appeared in public religious service 
with face and head uncovered. The case was 
otherwise with the Romans, and from later times 
with the Jews. In the Old Testament period 
such covering was employed only as a token of 
deep mourning (2 Sam. xv. 80; Jer. xiv. 13).— 
dishonoreth his head.—Suitably with the 
context we must here understand, not man’s own 
head literally, but Christ who is dishonored when 
the man denying his independence seems to sub- 
ordinate himself in this way to the dependent 
wife, or even allows the tokens of human de- 
pendence to be seen upon him.* Although in 
ver. 5, we are to take the expression ‘ her head’ 


*(Stanley says that both the literal and the metaphorical 
sense of the term head are here included. The man dis- 
honors his head by an unseemly effeminate. practice, 
and thereby Christ, who is his spiritnal head. Here the 
head, as being the symbol of Christ, is treated with the same 
religious reverence as is the body in vi.19,as being the 
temple of the Spirit! Hodge, on the contrary, prefers to 
take the word ‘head’ in its literal sense. “1. Because in 
the immediately preceding clause the word is used literally. 
2. Because in ver. 5 the woman who goes unveiled is said to 
dishonor her own head, 7. ¢., as what follows shows herself, 
and not her husband. 3. It is more obvionsly true that a 
man who acts inconsistently with his station disgraces him- 
self, than that he disgraces him who placed him in that sta- 
tien.” The force of the last argument Stanley does not allow, 
as will be seen above. Stanley’s view seems, all things con- 
sidered, to merit the preference]. 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





literally, yet nothing can be deduced from this 
as to the meaning of ver. 4, because there the 
meaning is established by ἑαυτῆς, and the ex- 
planation which follows. On the contrary, the 
relation to ver. 8 is decisive as to its meaning 
here. Such was Meyer’s view in ed. 2. Onthe 
contrary, in ed. 3 he understands it as in vv. 5, 
6, and 14 of the natural head, on which the evi- 
dence must be seen that no human person but 
Christ, and through Christ God is the head of 
the man, and this evidence is its uncovered state. 
At any rate the chief stress lies upon the rebuke 
administered to woman’s wish to become eman- 
cipated in this particular, and that said of the 
man might also serve for illustrating the oppe- 
site. 

Vers.5and6. But every woman that 
prayeth or prophesieth.—The propriety of 
women’s praying or prophesying in the Church, 
is here passed over without comment since he is 
only treating of apparel; while it is rebuked 
and interdicted in xiv. 848, Hence the arbi- 
trary assumption that prophesying here means 
simply chiming in with inspired song is super- 
fluous. [*‘In here disapproving of the one, says 
Calvin, he does not approve of the other. Paul 
attends to one thing at a time’”].—with her 
head unveiled.—The unveiling of the head 
was an abuse originating in female vanity under 
the pretexts of Christian freedom and of equality 
with man; and it was so much the more disturb- 
ing to devotion as it was contrary to custom te 
see women unveiled out of the house.—dis- 
honoreth her own head.—This referred te 
the man, would yield a good sense even in con- 
nection with what follows, inasmuch as the 
woman by appearing abroad so shamelessly and 
exposing herself to the gaze of other men might 
bring a blot upon her husband. But the use of 
the reflexive pronoun ἑαυτῆς shows clearly 
that it means the natural head; and this accords 
with what he says further, inasmuch as a shorn 
head was with women disgraceful—a symbol of 
female dishonor—-a toxen of shamelessness,— 
and, indeed, was made the punishment of an 
adulteress— at least among the Germans (see 
Tac., Germ. 19; also see WETSTEIN in hoc loco), 
and, indeed, also among the Jews, Numb. ν, 18. 
It was also a token of sorrow. Deut. xxi. 12. 
[Stanley again finds in the word ‘head’ a double 
allusion both to her own head and her husband’s 
as represented by it. See Smith’s Classical Dic- 
tionary, Coma and Vestalis].—for that is one 
and the same thing ;—the neuter is here 


used because it treats not of personal, but 


generic identity.—with her being shaven.— 
That is, she assumes the characteristic mark of 
a disreputable woman.—This identity he goes on 
to explain.—Let her be shorn.—This is not 
said permissively, but it expresses a command 
setting forth the legitimate consequence of the 
unsuitableness of her being unveiled, g. d., ‘if 
she will do the one thing, let her also do the other.’ 
If she will be so shameless as to appear with her 
head bare, let her act consistently, and give such 
a token of her shamelessness as will be seen in 
stripping her head entirely of its hair. — He 
then argues. — But if it is a shame fora 
woman to be shorn or shaven.—fupacVa, 
to be shaved—a stronger expression than κείρασο 


CHAP. XI. 2-16. 


225 





Sat, to be cropped short. αἰσχρόν, shameful, can 
hardly be taken here to denote the esthetic 
view of the matter as if the meaning were ‘if 
it displease her,’ so that we should have here 
but a sarcastic thrust at woman’s vanity, as 
Calvin thinks [who says that ‘the conjecture has 
some appearance of probability that women who 
had beautiful hair, were accustomed to uncover 
their heads for the purpose of displaying their 
beauty, and that Paul here hints to them that so 
far from appearing the more beautiful by taking 
off their veils, they looked as badly as if they 
were all shaven and shorn.’] The Apostle is rather 
looking at the subject from a moral point of view 
throughout. 

Ver. 7-10. He here resumes the argument for 
the woman’s veiling her head, presented in ver. 
8. Only he drops the relation to Christ, and 
presents that of the man to the woman, illus- 
trating his point antithetically.—For a man in- 
deed ought not to veil his head.—The ex- 
pression οὐκ ὀφείλει means more than ‘he is 
not obliged,’ it denotes ‘he should not,’ ‘it is 
unbecoming for him.’ The reason of this is, 
that—he is the image and glory of God.— 
By this he indicates the godlike rule and lordly 
majesty (comp. Gen. i. 26) which the position of 
the man as the head of the wife involves, or 
which is in a peculiar manner exhibitedinit. By 
the expression ‘the glory of God’ he means that 
man carries in himself a likeness to the greatness 
and majesty of Godin so far as he rules in his own 
sphere with Godlike power and freedom. [‘+ He 
is created in the image of God, and therefore 
is the reflex of the divine glory, ‘being crowned 
with glory and honor,’ and haying, therefore, 
dominion over the works of God.’ He, therefore, 
ought to have nothing ona head which repre- 
sents so Divine a majesty, nothing on a counte- 
nance which reflects so Divine a glory.”’ Sran- 
LEY |.—Such is obviously the point brought out: 
not that he is set to show forth God’s glory, a 
thing which does not appertain to man exclusive- 
ly; not that He is the glory of God in so far that 
the woman has to veil herself before him, just 
as the seraphim do before the majesty of Jehovah; 


nor is δόξα = "3 for then Paul would have 


used the term ὁμοίωσις ; nor least of all is it to be 
understood as Fritzsche does on Rom. ili. 23. 
Ornamentum Dei quippe quo fingendo Deus, quantum 
posset, manifestaverit.—But the woman is the 
glory of man.—This she is in so far as she 
could be fashioned entirely out of his rib—an 
evidence quanti vir sit [11 Now, the wife is the 
glory of the man inasmuch as in her, in her 
management as a housewife, the exalted position 
of the man is made manifest; or inasmuch as she 
develops an independent activity only in subor- 
dination to him, and by virtue of his plenary 
power, or only in connection with him attains to 
her proper dignity and worth. [‘She always 
assumes his station; becomes a queen, if he is a 
king; and manifests to others the wealth and 
honor which belong to her husband.” Hopae. ] 
Paul does not add the word ‘‘image,” since it 
would be unsuitable on account of the diversity 
of sex; others say because it would otherwise 
appear as if the Divine image in her were ignored. 
But Paul is not speaking here in a religious or 
16 











L 


ethical sense.—The higher position of the man 
and the dependence of the woman are still fur- 
ther proved from the history of their creation, 
(their genetic relation. Meyrer.).—For man is 
not from woman, but woman from man.— 
[Here the emphasis rests on ‘is’ which is equiva- 
lent to ‘takes his being.’ The reference isto Gen. 
ii. 23.—é« τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς ἐλήφϑη aity.].—But 
this derivation rests again upon the fact that the 
object of the creation of the woman is in the 
man—not the reverse. In other words, the de- 
pendence of existence rests on the dependence of 
destination.—For neither was man created 
on account of the woman, but woman 
on account of the man.—That the “for” in 
this clause is to be taken as parallel with the 
previous one is improbable, because unnecessary. 
[Alford however disputes the subordination of 
the latter ‘for’ to the former, and makes the two 
parallel; but without reason. Certainly the view 
given above, which is Meyer’s and Stanley’s also, 
is in better accord with the Greek, kav γάρ, g. 
d., ‘and that for this reason, for,’ etc.].—From 
this relation of woman to man thus proven, he 
now draws his inferences in regard to her true 
mode of apparel.—For this cause ought the 
woman to have power upon her head.— 
[‘‘There is scarcely a passage in the New 
Testament which has so much taxed the learn- 
ing and ingenuity of commentators as this.” 
Hovcr. ‘In the difficulty of its several portions 
it stands alone in the New Testament, unless, per 
haps, we except Rev. xiii. 18; or Gal. iii. 20. 
Each part has its own particular obscurity.” 
Srantey]. In the first place, the term ‘“‘power” 
(ἔ ξ ovcia) isa very remarkable one. Interpreted 
by the context, this can only mean the veiling of 
the head, standing by metonymy for that, which 
was the token of power or authority. So Nean- 
DER, who adds: ‘The wife should have upon 
her head a symbol of the power which the man 
has over her, ὦ. ¢., the veil.”* The word itself, 
however, nowhere else occurs in this sense. As 
somewhat analogous to it, we have the word 
βασιλεία, which literally means kingdom, used 
evidently for diadem in Diod. Sic. 1. 47 (ἔχουσιν 
τρεῖς βασιλείας ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς: ‘they have three 
kingdoms on the head,’ meaning ‘three crowns’). 
A number of conjectural readings, and also va- 
ried attempts at explanation,—some strange, 
some arbitrary, may here be passed over. For 
an account of them, see Meyer, Osiander [and 
Stanley, whose note on this word is quite elabo- 
rate].—As an additional reason why the women 
should have the symbol of power on their heads, 
the Apostle subjoins.—on account of the an- 
gels.—Here, too, there has been a great elabo- 
ration of opinions, partly in the way of conjec- 
tural readings, and partly in attempts at expla- 
nation. The former deserve no mention [as the 





[* Wordsworth says, rather “an emblem of authority 
which she derives through man from God; and by throwing 
off her covering she throws away her ἐξουσιάν, or the mark 
of her own authority, which consists in the essential deri 
vation of her being throngh man from God. She forleits 
her own claim tu reverence by breaking that link of con- 
nection which binds her through man even to the throne of 
God.” But in opposition to this statement we need but cite 
a quotation made by Barnes from Chardin. Speaking of 
the head-covering used by the ladies of Persia, this author 
says, ‘only married women wear it; and it is the mark by 
which it is known that they are under subjection” ]. 


226 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


au ee 


present reading is supported by all good autho- 
rities; although Neander can hardly help the 
persuasion that it was a gloss introduced ante- 
rior to all the existing manuscripts, and so per- 
petuated]. As far as the latter are concerned, 
owing toa disinclination to assume that super- 
natural existences were meant, it has been 
thought that the ‘‘angels”’ here spoken of were 
of a human kind—whether it be officers of the 
church,* which can hardly be the case, from the 
lack of all qualifying terms (comp. Rey. i. 20: 
‘cunto the angel of the church,” e¢c.; Mal. ii. 7: 
“The priest—is the messenger (ἄγγελος) of the 
Lord of Hosts’’); or prophets, of which the 
same remark holds good; or messengers from 
other churches, which by no means follows from 
Jas. ii. 25, where Rahab is spoken of as ‘receiving 
the messengers:’ or whether it be unconverted 
husbands, or others not Christians, who might 
come into the congregations to make report. Τῇ, 
however, supernatural beings are understood to 
be meant, then the question arises whether these 
are good or bad spirits. If we suppose the lat- 
ter, then the reference here would be to the dan- 
ger of temptation through such evil spirits, either 
through the women’s being betrayed into un- 
hallowed thoughts, or through their tempting 
men to indulge the same by showing themselves 
unveiled. But from the lack of any definite limi- 
tation of the meaning of the term, or of any hint 
of the kind in the context, we can hardly sup- 
pose this class of spirits to be intended. He 
must mean therefore the good and holy angels. 
Yet the phrase is not to be construed as express- 
ing an oath which would be contrary to the 
usage of the language. Nor yet does it mean 
that women should veil their faces in presence 
of men,,who are here declared to be the image 
and glory of God, because angels do this in the 
Divine presence (Isa. vi.). Nor yet does the 
phrase denote the purpose not to give offence to 
their guardian angels by an indecorous appear- 
ance; for then would he have added the pronoun 
‘their’ to imply this. The most probable opin- 
ion is, that he means angels in general, who are 
regarded as being invisibly present with Christ 
in the assemblies of the church, and whose dis- 
pleasure would be awakened by the violation οὗ 
decency. ‘The first trace of such an idea, which 
appears also to have been advocated by the early 
fathers, is to be found in Ps. exxxvili. 1, ‘Also 
before the angels will I sing praise to Thee.” 
Traces of the same belief may be found also 
among the Jews of a later period. (Comp. Gro- 
tius on this text). Reverentia geniorum, qui forma- 
tionis hominum testes et spectatores fuerunt. The 
origin of the idea that angels were present at the 
creation of men, may be proved to have come 
from the rabbinical interpretations of Gen. i. 
26. [The view just given Hodge declares to be 
‘‘the common and only satisfactory interpreta- 
tion of the passage which answers all the de- 
mands of the context].” And Alford expresses 
his belief init, and adds that the reason of Paul’s 
thus speaking of the angels was, that he ‘had 
before his mind the order of the universal church, 
and prefers, when speaking of the assemblies of 





{* In support of this opinion, see some interesting state- 
rae in THomson’s “The Land and the Book,” Vol. I., pp. 


Christians, to adduce those beings who, as not 
entering into the gradation which he has here 
described, are conceived [of] as spectators of the 
whole, delighted with the decency and order of 
the servants of God.’ Such also is Calvin’s 
view, who says that “this was added by way of 
amplifying, g. d. ‘lf women uncover their 
heads, not only Christ, but all the angels, too, 
will be witnesses of the outrage.’ And this in- 
terpretation suits with the Apostle’s design, as 
he is here treating of different ranks.” Stan 
ley’s note, which is full of interesting informa- 
tion, is too long to be quoted here, and the cu- 
rious reader can only be referred to it. 

Vers. 11, 12. All proud depreciation of women 
on the part of men, as well as all disposition to 
retire on the part of women, Paul now opposes 
by qualifying his previous expressions and bring- 
ing to view the mutual connections of the sexes 
in the sphere of Christian life. And these he 
then refers back to their relations grounded in 
nature.—Nevertheless neither is woman 
without man, nor man without woman in 
the Lord.—To explain the word “Lord” of 
God, as if the phrase ‘in the Lord” meant on 
account of ‘God’s will and ordinance,’ would be 
contrary to Paul's use of language, and is by no 
means required by the relation of the two verses 
[11, 12], by which the harmony of the kingdom 
of grace and the kingdom of nature is indicated, 
or that the order of life obligatory in the sphere 
of redemption is grounded on that which pre- 
ceded it in the sphere of creation according to 
the Divinely ordained development of things 
therein.—But the question still arises whether 
the expression ‘‘in the Lord” is to be taken as a 
predicate with ‘is’ understood, as if he meant to 
say that the one is not without the other in com- 
munion with the Lord; or as an adverbial ex- 
pression qualifying the two clauses so as to im- 
ply that in the sphere of Christ both are insepa- 
rable. The sense is essentially the same in both 
constructions, and both are logically admissible. 
But the former better expresses Paul’s thought. 
He means that while the woman ought in the 
public assembly to show herself as one subordi- 
nated to the man in a dependence which is indi- 
cated both in her origin and in her destiny, ne- 
vertheless Christianity requires no separation of 
the sexes. Neither party stands for itself alone. 
Both belong essentially together, and point to 
one another. And even in relation to the Chris- 
tian life there is a mutual dependence, so that 
the one serves to supplement the other. As 
Bureer says: ‘In their relation to Christ, in 
that communion where both alike have the 
ground and aim of their spiritual life, the dis- 
tinction of the sexes is resolved into a mutual 
dependence of love.”—In what follows, Paul 
points to the fact that this relation in Christ 
corresponds to the natural relation existing be- 
tween the sexes, and is demanded by the essen- 
tial harmony which prevails between the king- 
dom of nature and the kingdom of grace. ‘*For 
were this not so, then would Christianity be op. 
posed to the natural order of things.”” MryEr.— 
In contrast with what is said in ver. 8, and here 
re-stated, that—the woman is from the 
man—he says—so also is the man through 
the woman.—As the former declaration refers 


CHAP. XI. 2-16. 


to the origin of the woman, so does the latter refer 
tothe progressive reproduction of the race, which 
eyen in the case of the man is effected through 
the woman.—And lastly, he sets this natural re- 
lation under a religious point of view.—but all 
things of God—z. 6., God is the first principle 
of all things, of the existence of woman from the 
man, and of man through the woman. But the 
logical relation of the two verses does not require 
that we refer this to what was said in ver. 11 by 
the expression “in the Lord.” From this brief 
digression he returns to his immediate sub- 
ject. 

: Vers. 13-15. He here appeals once more to 
their natural sense of propriety.—Judge in 
yourselves.—. 6., without reference to any ex- 
ternal authorities by which their judgment might 
be biased. We are not to suppose that Paul is 
here accommodating himself to the fondness for 
philosophic proof prevalent among the Greeks, 
as Riickert imagines. He intends only to bring 
the matter closer home to their own conscious- 
ness, both softening and sharpening his reproof 
at the same time. [*‘The Apostle often recog- 
nizes the intuitive judgments of the mind as 
authoritative, Rom. i. 32; 111, 8. The constitu- 
tion of our nature being derived from God, the 
laws which He has impressed upon it, are as 
much a revelation from Him, as any other possi- 
ble communications of His will. And to deny 
this, is to deny the possibility of all knowledge.” 
Hover ].—Is it comely that a woman pray 
unto God uncovered ?— By praying unto 
God, he does not mean silent participation in 
public worship, but as in ver. 5, taking the lead in 
audible prayer.—If the women, while they were 
thus putting themselves upon an equality with 
men, deemed themselves at liberty on this ac- 
count to appear like the men unveiled, it is so 
much the more remarkable, that Paul should 
refer them simply to the uncomeliness of their 
behavior while holding public intercourse with 
God, whose ordinance they were violating in so 
doing. Hence he here says nothing about pro- 
phesying.—That the sense of propriety required 
a woman to be veiled, is shown from the sponta- 
neous teachings of nature.—Doth not nature 
itself teach you that if a man have long 
hair, it is a shame unto him, but that if a 
woman have long hair it is a glory to 
her ?—The οὐδέ had best be translated not even, 
which imparts to the whole question a greater 
emphasis. In regard to ‘‘nature,” the question 
arises whether the word is to be taken in the ob- 
jective sense, as denoting the order and laws of 
nature, or in the subjective sense, as denoting the 
instinctive feelings and sentiments, the native 
sense of propriety existing in every individual, 
and which may have been more or less affected 
by custom and habit. The latter interpretation 
cannot be altogether established from the mean- 
ing of the word. But the former yields good 
sense, a8 we understand by it here to denote the 
natural constitution of the sexes, and the richer 
growth of hair in the woman. In observing these 
constitutional tendencies, a significant hint is 
derived as to what is befitting in the premises. 
Accordingly, in contrast with the practices of a 
cruder heathenism of the earlier time, when long 
bair prevailed, there has grown up among the 





227 





most civilized nations, that good taste which de- 
clares itself in favor of short hair for men and 
long hair for women. Among men, the wearing 
of long hair is now reprobated as a mark of effe~ 
minacy and dishonoring to them, inasmuch as it 
prevents the free exposure of the countenance. 
[The Nazarites, as a distinction, allowed their 
hair to grow]. The main stress of the Apostie’s 
instruction, however, bears upon the duty of 
woman, and he assigns as one reason for her 
wearing her hair long, that—her hair is given 
to her instead of a covering.—From this it 
follows that the artificial veiling which he has 
spoken of above, is also an honor to the woman, 
while going unveiled disgraces her, since na- 
ture itself seems to have insisted upon the yveil- 
ing of her head. [Chardin writes respecting the 
ladies of Persia: ‘‘ The head-dress of the women 
is simple: their hair is drawn behind the head, 
and divided into several tresses: the beauty of 
this head-dress consists in the thickness and 
length of these tresses, which should fall even 
down to the heels, in default of which, they 
lengthen them with tresses of silk. The ends of 
these tresses they decorate with pearls and jewels, 
or ornaments of gold or silver.” (Barnes). This 
method of wearing the hair is common among 
all Eastern nations, and it shows how woman’s 
hair was regarded as ‘‘a covering.” But the 
Apostle, it will be observed, makes no allusion 
to the customs of nations in the matter, nor is 
even the mention of them relevant. This, it will 
be important to observe, since many are inclined 
to construe his instructions as applicable only 
to those early times, being fashioned in accord- 
ance with customs then prevalent. So far 15 
this, however, from being the case, that he ap- 
peals for support, solely to the Divine ordinances 
in nature, and therefore imparts a lesson which 
is applicable alike for all times]. 

Ver. 16. He concludes by asserting his own 
custom and the custom of other Churches, as an 
answer to those contentious people who might 
refuse to concede the validity of his arguments. 
—Butif any man seem to be contentious. 
—0doxet does not mean incline, for this idea is ex- 
pressed by 1 δοκεῖ. It may be explained as 
denoting either ‘ thinks he is at liberty to be,’ or 
as a delicate turn after the fashion of the Latin 
videtur: hence essentially the same as ἐστίν. In 
the apodosis the expression is elliptical, and we 
must supply some such phrase as ‘let him un- 
derstand that,’-—we,—that is, himself and his 
fellow-Apostles, and those of lke sentiment.— _ 
have no such custom.—It is questionable 
whether he means here the custom of women’s 
appearing unveiled, just animadverted upon, or 
the contentiousness he is anticipating. The lat- 
ter interpretation suits with the use of the word 
‘we,”? which otherwise would suggest thethought 
of some Jewish custom had in mind, a thing 
that does not suit here; and also of the Churches 
of God, he could very properly say tbat conten- 
tious disputing was not allowed among them, 
and was cot their custom. [Such is the view 
given by Chrysostom, Calvin, Meyer, de Wette, 
and many of the best modern commentators, 
But in regard to it Alford well says: ‘Surely 
it would be very unlikely that after so long a 
treatment of a particular subject, the Apostle. 


228 





should wind up all by merely censuring a fault 
common to their behavior on this and on all the 
other matters of dispute. Such a rendering 
seems to me almost to stultify the conclusion. 
But for the weighty names on the other side, it 
would seem hardly to admit of a question, that 
the custom which he here disayows, was the prac- 
tice of women praying uncovered. He thus cuts 
off all further disputation on the matter, by ap- 
pealing to universal Christian usage.’’ With this 
view agree Grot., Billroth, Olsh., Hodge, and 
others]. The allusion to the Churches of God 
carries great emphasis, as decisive of the point 
in question, and shutting up all strife. It might 
be said that here was a genuine Catholic ele- 
ment set in opposition to a self-opinionated par- 
ticularism. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The unity amid diversity in the Divine economy. 
The Sovereign of the heavenly kingdom is the 
Son who is one with the Father, and yet has God 
for His Head. Yea, as the One who is of the 
Father, and derives all things from the Father, so 
as to be able to say, ‘All Thine are mine,” 
is He dependent on the Father, and distinguish- 
able from Him both in His unity and in His 
equality.—The same law reappears in the human 
sphere. Here man is the chief power, and wo- 
man is dependent on him. There is the same 
humanity in both, and the same Divine life in 
both. But as the woman originally derived her 
life from the man, and so is subordinate to him 
in all the relations of life, being created for him 
and designed to be his helper; so likewise in the 
spiritual sphere, in the domain of God’s Church 
is woman subordinate to man. Here, too, is it 
the life of the man through which the Lord pri- 
marily acts. Men are the bearers of the Divine 
message; they proclaim the Divine truth, and by 
virtue of it beget a spiritual life in others; and 
they are the shepherds who foster the life thus 
begotten in its onward development. And as in 
his doings and management the majesty of God 
is reflected, so is the glory of man reflected in 
woman, and in her activities in so far as she acts 
by the authority and power of the man mould- 
ing, informing and training the life received 
from him, and ruling in the household set up by 
him, to order, counsel and educate within her 
own sphere. This is a genuine womanliness, 
which manifests itself in the constant conscious- 
ness of such a dependence which every where fol- 
lows the man, which regards his mind and will 
as the ground and rule of her action, which is 
never ubtrusive, arrogates no functions belong- 
ing to the man, and always wears the appearance 
of modesty and decorum whatever may be the 
prevailing fashion of the times. 

But as in the natural sphere, man with all his 
freedom and independence, is in turn conditioned 
upon the woman, deriving his existence through 
her; and as the man with all his freedom cannot 
isolate himself from the woman, but is obliged 
to find in her the complement of his whole being 
and existence, so is it likewise in the sphere of 
his Christian life. As the woman ordinarily im- 
parts a salutary and refining influence to man’s 
ymoral and social life, tempering his strength 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





with her mildness, and adding her plastic power 
to his, in the whole business of education; so ig 
it likewise in the spiritual life. As an evidence 
of what she is and can do here, we can point te 
the lives of many distinguished men in the 
kingdom of God, who have owed their greatness 
to wise and pious mothers. If on the one 
hand woman, in fellowship with man, obtains 
through his influence energy and boldness, power 
and independence, freedom and breadth of cha- 
racter, by means of which she is raised above - 
her natural state without injury to her feminine 
qualities, and is brought to share in his being 
without altering, but rather ennobling her wo- 
manliness; so on the other hand, through the 
influence of woman, the angularity and sharp- 
ness, the harshness and strength of the mascu- 
line nature become softened, and acquire a 


gentleness and grace, which without injuring 


his true manliness, adorns and ennobles his 
whole life. And both these effects are seen in 
their purest and highest forms within the 
sphere of Christianity. And inthis sphere alone 
is man able to assert and realize in a truly mo- 
ral way his proper position and influence, for 
here he has Christ as his Head. By this means, 
also, are the relations of the divine and the hu- 
man spheres properly mediated. In a certain 
sense, Christ, the Son of God, the First-born of 
all creatures, in and through whom all things 
were made, the original image of God after 
which man was fashioned, the primeval glory 
of God of which human glory is but a ray, must 
be considered as the Head of the man, in all the 
spheres of earthly life, from the beginning to the 
end; and all true manliness, with its elevating 
influence upon the character of woman, must be 
referred back to Him:—just as in like manner 
the receptivity and formative activity of the wo- 
man, and the identity of the two-fold life in mar- 
riage, is grounded upon the divine act that made 
them partakers of one common nature. And 
both these are truly realized in their mutual in- 
fluences in Christianity in that sphere of redemp- 
tion which has been wrought out and perfected 
by the incarnate Son of God. Here the man de- 
pends on Christ by faith, and derives from His 
fulness power, wisdom and love, which enable 
him to prove a true support for the woman who 
has been redeemed by the same Christ, is united 
with him in faith, and is taken into personal 
communion with him, imparting to her what he 
has received from Christ, and in the love of 
Christ, who gave Himself for them, devotes his 
strength and all his qualities, and so leadsher on _ 
under his influence that she is daily strengthened 
through the divine grace derived through him, 
and so becomes, in turn for him, just what she, 
according to her own way and: destiny, can be, 
and ought to be by virtue of this same divine 
life—a true Christian wife, a veritable help—meet 
for him in God. 

[2. Dress is not only an article of comfort and 
convenience, but also, in its original design and 
use, isa symbol: 1, Of our fallen state—betoken- 
ing sin and shame. 2, Of sex—distinguishing 
between man and woman. 8, Of rank and sta- 
tion—designating by its specific differences the 
positions which persons holdin life. 4, Of cha- 
racter and sentiment—expressing in its style the 


CHAP. XI. 2-16. 





peculiarities, good or bad, of the wearer. In 
consequence of this, its symbolic character, it 
becomes every Christian to be particular as to 
the manner of his dress, and see to it that it pro- 
perly expresses the position which he occupies 
in society, and in the Church of God, and that it 
indicates those qualities of character which it 
becomes him always to cherish and manifest. 
This rule applies alike to both sexes, and ought 
to be fully considered by Christians at this day, 
when the propensity is so strong for complying 
with the fashions of a world, which, in forgetting 
God, is too apt also to ignore and violate the 
just relations held by men and women in society. 
Above all things ought ‘“‘ women professing god- 
liness to adorn themselves in modest apparel, 
with shame-facedness and sobriety,” resisting 
firmly every fashion that may prove either a dis- 
honor to themselves or a temptation to man]. 

[8. Nature and Christianity. Both originating 
in the same God, appear in perfect harmony. 
The laws of nature confirm the dictates of Chris- 
tianity, and Christianity accepts, authenticates 
and sanctifies the teachings of nature. In this 
mutual support we find one evidence of the truth 
of revelation]. 

[4. The New Testament confirms the truth of 
the Old Testament, even in those particulars 
which it has been too much the fashion to dis- 
credit as a meremyth or allegory. In referring 
for proof to the facts of the history of the crea- 
tion, Paul here establishes the credibility of the 
Mosaic narrative in all its literalness. It is im- 
possible, therefore, for any Christian who be- 
lieves in the inspiration of the Apostles, to doubt 
the divine authority of the Pentateuch, or to con- 
fine the inspiration of the ancient writers to their 
doctrinal and preceptive statements ]. 

[5. The authority of the Apostles is the end of 
controversy. To argue against what they have 
established is, therefore, to show a contentious 
and rebellious spirit, that, instead of being rea- 
soned with, had best be let alone]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke:—Ver. 2. As a father toward his 
child, so does a faithful minister toward his 
Church use all means—praise and censure—for 
urging his hearers to goodness and piety (iv. 
14; 1 Thess. ii. 11 ff.).—As faithful ministers 
remember their people, to pray for, love and 
serve them, so should the people remember their 
ministers, to pray for, assist and give heed to 
their lessons.—Ver. 3. For a happy marriage, it 
is essential, 1, that the husband acknowledge 
Christ as his head, and rule in his spirit; 2, that 
he prove the head of the wife in fact, yet not in 
such a way as to destroy her courage and confi- 
dence; 3, that the wife acknowledge her husband 
as her head—not undertaking to act as master. 
—Ver. 4. In public worship, as also everywhere 
else, Christians ought to preserve decorum ac- 
cording to established usages (Ex. xix. 10, 11). 
—Spener: It is incumbent on Christians in all 
their religious services to indicate by their ap- 


pearance and demeanor a reverence for the pre-. 


sence of God—man and woman conducting them- 
selves according to the divine intent in their 
creation.—Hepincer: As God and nature have 


229 





distinguished offices and sexes, so have they alse 
appointed distinctions in apparel and demeanor, 
which should be observed according to public 
custom, and so as to avoid offence (Deut. xxii. 
5).—Ver. 6. None should allow themselves to 
be forced to do that which is good. Willing 
obedience is what pleases God.—Ver. 8. Behold 
the wisdom of God in fitting man and woman to 
the position designed for them severally in mar- 
riage.—Ver. 9. It is a perversion of God’s ordi- 
nance, when a woman usurps authority over her 
husband, or when a man, from fond affection, 
becomes the slave of his wife.—Hup.: As the 
lord of the household, man must keep his place, 
and he commits a great mistake when from any 
side considerations he forms a marriage contract 
that requires him to yield his position. Yet 
‘dwell with your wives according to knowledge” 
(1 Pet. iii. 7), and tenderness as ‘‘ fellow heirs of 
the grace of life,” on whom God has enjoined 
obedience as a praiseworthy duty—which has, 
however, since the fall proved a cross to the 
weak and a vexation to the unregenerate.—Ver. 
10. A dress designed for the ball-room is un- 
suited to the house of God, where it becometh 
women to assume a modest attire, if not for the 
sake of man, yet at least for the sake of the an- 
gels present there, and for the sake of God, who 
has promised there to come and bless His peo- 
ple (Ex. xx. 24).—Ver. 11. Man and woman 
have an equal right to the kingdom of God; they 
have been redeemed at an equal cost, and may 
obtain like blessedness; therefore let not man 
plume himself on his supremacy, nor woman feel 
disgraced on account of her subjection.—Ver. 12. 
Christ Himself was born of woman; hence men 
should honor and love their wives, and wives not 
begrudge their husbands their lordship. All 
things are of God—man and woman and the or- 
dinances regulating their relations; hence, to 
Him belongs the honor due, in all humility and 
obedience. What is comely should be cultivated, 
because well pleasing to God no less than toman 
(Phil. iv.8).—Ver. 15. Long hairis an honor to 
a woman; but she should not proudly parade it ; 
rather it should be to her a sign of subjection, 
and serve for a covering.—Ver. 16. True church 
members will never compel others to adopt 
their own opinions, however well grounded, nor 
wrangle about them; but will quietly let wran- 
glers pass and leave them to their own responsi- 
bility. 

Berens. ΒΙΒΙΕ :—Ver. 2. He who will main- 
tain the spirit of Christianity in its integrity, will 
show it even in little things.—Ver. 3. All true 
order has its foundations above.—The distine- 
tions which God has made between the sexes 
cannot be arbitrarily overridden.—Man must 
conduct himself according to the type set by 
Christ. If he prides himself on his authority, 
and is not at the same time obedient to his Lord, 
nor abides in His Spirit, he is guilty of flagrant 
folly. His example encourages the wife to be 
disobedient too. As Christ is submissive to God, 
and is intimately united to Him, so must man be 
related to Christ. He must be as a Christian, 
and act consistently with his profession.—Vv. 
7-9. These first principles sound like old tales; 
but let us keep them fresh by constant applica- 
tion. The order of nature must be held close 


230 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





with the order of creation and Providence, and 
with the history of Moses.—Ver. 10. Christianity 
consists in a life of subjection; but it is by this 
means that Satan is overcome.—Vyv. 11,12. Man 
and wife are united as head and body—the one 
cannot exist without the other; therefore, each 
should consent to unite with the other in one un- 
derstanding, purpose andhead. In the kingdom 
of grace there must be no infraction upon the 
kingdom of nature. They concur, and have 
their lesson from the Lord, and their blessing 
through ‘the seed of the woman.”—The man, 
however, cannot abide in the Lord unless he be 
condescending to his wife. It is a valuable ex- 
ercise in Christianity to be referring all matters, 
even the least, to the Lord, whence all things 
come. God is the source of all things, and if we 
do not go back to the origin of things as revealed 
we shall not discover their true law and order. 
—Ver. 13. God has given woman certain signa- 
tures, which shall indicate to her how she is to 
conduct herself outwardly. Prayer begets re- 
verence and docility.—Vy. 14, 15. Nature must 
not be abandoned in common life, much less in 
holy services. 

Rieger :—Ver. 2 ff. There is something very 
delicate about our good standing in the kingdom 
of God, far more than about the most refined 
court-fashion in the world. If we hesitate to 
offend against the latter in the slightest particu- 
lar of dress or deportment, how much more 
should we hesitate in the case of the former.— 
The man finds his Head in Christ, from whom he 
derives grace and gifts not only for himself, but 
also for his house; but woman is to find her 
head in man, even aside from the marriage rela- 
tion, because in the constitution and manage- 
ment of the Church all depends on men. And 
this should not appear hard, since in the work 
of redemption there exists just such a mutual 
relation between Christ and God. He derives 
everything from the fulness of the Father, and 
refers back to Him what He, as the Mediator, 
brings to us. 

Hrevupner:—Ver. 8. Every regulation should 
be so referred back to our religious instincts 
and to fundamental principles, as to be made 
the standard of decorum for every age.—Ver. 7. 
Man is the Lord of the house—the image and 
representative of God—the one from whom the 
majesty of God should be reflected. The wife 
represents at home the absent man, and should 
exhibit his image in herself; she has authority 
only from him [even as she bears his name]. 
Hence both should so carry themselves in de- 
‘portment and attire, that the supremacy of the 
man and the subordination of the woman shall 
be recognized.—Ver. 9. It is a sad perversion 
of God’s ordinance, when women. regard men 





-----.-.-.-.Θ.Ὀὡὦὃ} 


simply as the means of their convenience, honor, 
or comfort.—A wife who fails to further the just 


interests of her husband, contravenes the ἀρ’ 


pointment of God.—Christianity is innocent of 
that silly worship of ladies which has often been 
observed in Christian nations. Yet woman is 
not on this account to be regarded as the mere 
instrument of the man.—Ver. 11. Christianity 
balances the inequality through the equality, 
secured in Christ, in whom both ought to be re- 
garded as one. Before God all stand on one 
footing.—Ver. 18. Our moral sentiments often 
decide a question more correctly than the under- 
standing. Most of all, in our devotions should 
modesty rule and protect the heart. Can the 
bold, the shameless, the restless pray ? 

W. F. Besser :—Ver. 11. The Greeks excluded 
woman from certain solemnities of their idol- 
worship; on the contrary, in Christianity mar- 
ried couples walk together to the house of God, 
sit side by side at the table of the Lord, unite at 
the morning and evening blessing, and are to- 
gether in all the observances where life in the 
Lord is fostered. In Thee, O Lord! the man is 
not without the woman, and woman is not with- 
out the man; but in order that both may remain 
in Thee, keep Thou them steadfast in obedience 
to Thy will, that the woman may serve Thee in 
subjection to the man, and the man may be the 
head of the house in Thee !—Ver. 16. A praise- 
worthy ordinance which has in it a sound Chris- 
tian sense, should not be mutilated, deranged, 
and perverted, through mere love of change or 
selfish cunning, if for no other reason than this, 
that unedifying and useless strife is thereby 
evoked, in which each one deems his own was 
the best. 

[ WorpswortH:—4-15. St. Paul here teaches 
the Christian women, who more than any women 
in the world, needed such instruction, that by 
obtrusive boldness and wanton effrontery, and 
by presumptuous shamelessness and flaunting 
immodesty in public, in the House of God, they 
gained nothing, but forfeited that dignity, power, 
and grace, which God had given to women, es- 
pecially under the Gospel.—Thus the Divine 
Apostle has left a lesson to women in every age, 
a lesson which in the present age deserves spe- 


cial attention, when the attire of some among _ 


them seems to expose them to that reproof which 
was spoken through him by the Holy Spirit to 
the women of Corinth.—Let them learn from 
him, that the true power of woman is in gentle 
submission; her most attractive grace and genu- 
ine beauty are in modest retirement and delicate 
reserve; her best ornament, ‘‘that of a meek 
and quiet spirit, which, in the sight of God, is 
of great price”’ (1 Pet. iii. 4)]. 


γῶ 


CHAP. XI. 17-84. 231 
es -------.-- - 


B. On the contrast between the rich and poor at church-feasts, as inconsistent with the idea of the Lord’s 
Supper, and provocative of the Divine judgments. 


CHAPTER XI. 17-34. 


17 Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not [But this I command you, 
τς not praising you, παραγγέλλω οὐχ ἐπαινῶν], that ye come together not for the 
18 better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church [a 
public assembly, ἐν éxxAjoia],? I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly 
19 [in some degree, μέρος τι] believe it. For there must be also heresies [sects, afp¢- 
σεις} among you, that they* which are approved may be made manifest among you. 
20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this [i¢] is not to eat the Lord’s sup- 
21 per. For in eating every one taketh before other* his own [private, τὸ 7d:ov] supper: 
22 and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What! [For, yap] have ye not houses to 
eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have 
23 not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise® you in this?* I praise you not. For I 
have [om. have, παρέλαβον] received of the Lord that which also I [have, παρέδωχα] 
delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, 
24 took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat’ [om, 
Take eat]; this is my body, which is broken® [om. broken] for you: this do in remem- 
25 brance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, 
saying, This cup is the new testament [covenant, διαθήχῃ] in my blood: this do ye, as 
26 oft as ye drink ἐξ, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and 
drink this [the]? cup, ye do shew [proclaim, χαταγγέλλετε] the Lord’s death till he 
27 come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread,” and [or, ἢ] drink this cup of the 
28 Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and [the]" blood of the Lord. But let 
a man examine [make trial of, δοχιμαξέτωἼ himself, and so let him eat of that [the 
29 τοῦ] bread, and drink of that [the, τοῦ] cup. For he that eateth and drinketh un- 
worthily, [om. unworthily]? aateth and drinketh damnation [judgment, χρῖμα] to him- 
30 self, not discerning the Lord’s [if he does not discern the, μὴ διαχρίνων] body. For 
31 this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For [But, δὲ] if 
we would judge [had judged, διεχρίνομεν] ourselves, we should not be [have been 
32 judged, οὐχ ἂν ἐχρινόμεθα] judged. But when we are judged [now that we are judged, 
xpwépevot], we are chastened of the Lord,‘ that we should not be condemned with the 
33 world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for 
another. And [om. And}" if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not 
34 together unto condemnation [judgment, χρῖμα]. And the rest will I set in order when 
I come. 


1 Ver. 17.—The Rec. has παραγγέλλων οὐκ ἐπαινῶ. The authorities are about equally balanced, but the internal pro- 
babilities are in favor of παραγγέλλω ο. ἐπαινῶν, the more difficult reading. [Lachmann, Tischendorf and Alford adopt 
this reading, from A. C. F.G., 10 cursives, the Syr. (both), Arm., Ital., Aith., Vulg., Ambrst., Aug., Pelag., Bede. The Rec. 
has in its favor, Ὁ. (3d hand) E. K. L. Sinait., several cursives, the Copt., Slay., Chrys., Theodt., and is defended by Reiche and 
Bloomfield, D. (1st hand), 137, and Sahid., have παραγγέλλω οὐκ ἐπαινῶ, and B. with a Lambeth cursive has παραγγέλλων οὐκ 
ἐπαινῶν. The Rec. was probably a correction to suit vv. 2 and 22.—C. P. W.}. 

2 Ver. 18.—The Rec., which has τῇ before ἐκκλησίᾳ, is feebly sustained: [with @cum., Theophyl. and a few unimpor- 
tant cursives, from an idea that by éxxA. was meant the church proper. Theodoret has instead of ἐν ἐκκλ. the words: ἐπὶ 
τὸ αὐτὸ, from yer. 20.—C. P. W.]. 

3 Ver. 19.—The καὶ after ἵνα is rather doubtful. Many very good MSS. are without it. [They are: A.C. Ὁ. (2d and 3d 
hand) E. Ε. α. K. L., Sinait., Syr. (later) Copt., Orig., Epiph., Chrys., Theodt., Damasc., Cypr.—C. P. W.]. 

[2 Ver. 21—For προλαμβάνει, a considerable number of cursives and Zonaras (Tisch.) have προςλαμβ., probably from 
an attempt to explain and make less difficult the fact here stated.—O. P. W.]. 

5 Ver. 22.—Lachmann has ἐπαινῶ for ἐπαινέσω, but not with sufficient authorities. It was probably a conformation to 
the preceding and following presents. [It is sustained only by B. F.G., the Italic, Vulg. and the Latin fathers.—C. P. W.]. 

®[ Ver. 22.—Stephens (the Elz.), Griesb., Scholz, and Tisch., Sinait. and B. (1st cor.), the Vulg., Goth. and Syr. (later) 
punctuate so that ἐν τούτῳ is taken not with ἐπαινέσω, but with the following οὐκ érawa.—. P. We. 

7 Ver, 24.—After εἶπεν the Rec. has λάβετε, φάγετε: but the words are not genuine in this place, and are taken from 
Matth. xxvi. 26, efc. [The reading of the Rec. is sustained only by C. (3d hand) K. L., a few cursives, one copy of the Syr. 
(both), Chrys., Theodt., Damasc., @cum., Theophyl. The Vulg., Arm., Slay. and Ambrst. also add καὶ after λάβετε. But A. 
B.C. Ὁ. E. F.G., Sinait., omit both words as well as cai.—C. P. W.]. 

8 Ver. 24.—The additions κλώμενον (Rec.), θρυπτόμενον, and διδόμενον, are attempts which have been made to complete 
our Lord’s expression. The best MSS. have simply τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν. [Κλώμενον is omitted in A. B. C., Sinait., 17,67 (2d hand). 


282 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


.-----.- -Ῥ.--.Ἐἔ.. 


Athan., Cyr. and Vulg., but it is given by the second hands of C. D. and Sinait., and in F. K. L., the Syr. (both), Goth., Theodt, 


Damasc., Zcum., Theophyl. In D. (first hand) is θρυπτ., and in the Copt. and Arm. is διδόμ. The Vulgate has: 
Very properly the three words are thrown out by Lachm., Tisch., Bloomfield and Alford.—C. P. W.1. 


vobis tradetur. 


d pre 


9 Ver. 26.—After ποτήριον the Rec. has τοῦτο, but in opposition to the best authorities. The same may be said of the as 


instead of ἐὰν after yap. 


10 Ver. 27.—After ἄρτον the Rec. inserts τοῦτον, but it is feebly sustained. [The Eng. A. V. has and instead of or i i 
verse. Alford, in his work on “ How to use the Epistles” (Sund. Mag., April, 1867), severely censures this κε ρδωδίτοι 


[t is not impossible that our Translators were influenced by their hostility to the Romish construction. 


And yet their 


rendering is sustained by A.,4 cursives, one MS. of the Vulgate, the Syr. (both), Copt., Sahid., Clem., Pseudo-Athan-, Ori 
and some Latin writers. Some of these authorities, however, were not known tothem. The 7 is found in B.C. Ὁ. F.K.L, 
Sinait., [tal., Syr. (Philox.), Chrys., Theodt., Damasc., Cypr.—C. P. W.]. > 


ll Ver. 27.—The Rec. omits τοῦ before αἵματὸς 


The best MSS. insert it. 


12 Ver, 29.—The words avagiws after πίνων, and του κυρίου after σῶμα, are not to be found in the best MSS. See 


the Exegetical notes. 


(The former word is wanting in A. B.C. Sinait., 17, Sahid. and Ath., and the latter in the same 


MSS. with 67, and some copies of the Vulgate. They are thrown out by Lachm., Tisch., Meyer, Alford and Stanley, but 
they are defended by Osiander, Bloomfield, Wordsworth and Hodge. They seem to be a gloss from ver. 27, to complete 


what is certainly a difficult sense without them.—C, P. W.]. 


13 Ver. 31—The Rec. has γάρ but δέ is sustained by better authorities. 
[14 Ver, 32 —Before κυρίου, Tischendorf (7th ed.) and Wordsworth insert a τοῦ after B. C. Sinait. et al.; Alford brackets 


it; but Lachm., Bloomfield and Stanley cancel it, as “more likely to be added than removed.’’—C. P. W. 
15 Ver. 34.—The Rec. after et has δέ. but in opposition to decisive authorities. [It is omitted in A. B. 


‘. D. E. F.G. Sin: 


the Lat., Vulg. and Copt. versions, Chrys. (in comm.) and the Lat. Fathers.—C. P. W.]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[In order to the right understanding of this 
section it must be premised: 1. That it was the 
primitive custom to celebrate the Lord’s Supper 
in private houses (Acts ii. 46); although there is 
reason to believe, as will soon be seen, that the 
Corinthians had already a specific place for pub- 
lic worship. Yet, supposing this to have been 
the case, it would be natural to infer that the 
habits and sentiments attaching to the obser- 
vance at the private house, would be transferred 
to what might be called ‘*the church.” 2. That 
the Lord’s Supper was held ‘daily ” (Acts ii. 46), 
and was usually connected with an ordinary 
meal; although even in this respect the language 
of the text seems to imply a change to a less 
frequent observance; perhaps the first day of the 
week, as was afterwards the custom (Acts xx. 
7). 8. That this meal was often made up of 
contributions brought by the communicants, to 
be enjoyed in common, and which came to be 
called an Agape (ἀγάπη) or love-feast, where the 
fellowship of the Christian community was exhi- 
bited and cultivated in a social festival. 4. That 
the custom of enjoying such social repasts existed 
also among the Greeks. With them these re- 
pasts were termed épavot, club feasts, which were 
associated with plans of mutual relief or charity 
toward the poor, where the practice was for 
each guest to eat that which he brought with 
him in his own basket. And what an influence 
this heathen observance, so often attended with 
disorder and rioting, would haye upon the minds 
of recent converts present at a similar Christian 
festival, can be readily imagined. Bearing these 
four facts in mind, we shall be able the more 
yeadily to appreciate the nature of the difficulties 
which had arisen in the church, and the occasion 
of the Apostolic rebuke and injunction. And in 
nll this we shall see an illustration of the old 
proverb, that ‘‘evil customs give rise to good 
laws.”? See these facts more fully brought out 
in STaNLey’s valuable note, and also in articles 
under ‘Lord’s Supper,” in Krrro’s Biblical Cy- 
clopxdia, Alexander's Fd.; and Smitu’s Dictionary 
of the Bible; Rivpwe’s Christian Antiquities, p. 
600; Neanper, Plant. and Train. of the Christian 
Church, pp. 23, 163; Souarr, Hist. of the Aposto- 
lic Church, p. 18 ff.]. 


Ver. 17. Now this I command.—He here 
refers to the foregoing precept; and through a 
participial clause expressing a contrast with 
what he says in ver. 2, he connects with it a re- 
buke of further evils in their church assemblies— 
Not praising (you).—-We should have expected 
to see the sentence here differently constructed, 
having the main verb in the form of a participle, 
and the participle in the form of the main verb; 
since it is on the latter that the emphasis evi- 
dently lies. Hence the ordinary reading, which 
for this very reason is not to be maintained. If, 
however, with Lachmann [and Stanley], we in- 
clude ver. 16 in this paragraph, then the words 
τοῦτο παραγγέλλω would point to what follows, 
and be rendered: ‘ Now this I declare unto you’ 
[as the E. V.], which rendering would be con- 
trary to the New Testament usage. And to this 
we may add that the previous paragraph requires 
just such a conclusion as is found in ver. 16. 
There is no need whatever of supposing that the 
strifes and schisms alluded to in ver. 18 refer to 
the contentiousness spoken of in ver. 16. Be. 
sides, the reference of τοῦτο, this, to what follows 
is inadmissible, since no directions do follow im- 
mediately; and in order to find any, we must 
look onward to ver. 33 ff., which would be too 
remote. Still further, there is no need of looking 
for them here, since the close connection with 
the precepts immediately preceding by means of 
the participial clause, is sufficiently motived by 
that which is common to the two paragraphs, 
viz., disorders in the church assembly; and to 
this we may add the contrast between the ‘not 
praising” and the “1 praise” of ver. 22, g. d. 
‘But this precept I give not praising you, as in 
the former instance, in that,’ etc.*—that [ὅτε, not, - 
because, as Alf., Words.] ye come together.— 
‘¢Hitherto he has been speaking only of the am- 
bitious few; but now he feels obliged to rebuke 
the whole church for a prevailing evil.’”’? NEAn- 
prr.—Not for the better, but for the 
worse.—These phrases do not indicate the way 





[* The unnaturalness of the construction here advocated 
by Kling furnixhes a strong argument in favor of the inter- 
pretation given by Chrys., Grot., Bengel, Lachmann and 
others, which makes τοῦτο refer to what follows according 
to the well-known classic usage (JELF, Grammar, ἃ 657, 2), 
and takes παραγγέλλω in its original meaning, announce.— 
or, as translated by Tindal, Cranmer, in the Geneva Bible, 
warn you of; we should then have a fitting introduction to 
his new theme: “This moreover I declare unte you, or warn 
you of, not praising you,” ‘as in the former case, where ip 
many particulars you did merit approval’). 


CHAP. XI. 17-34. 


238 





und manner of their assembling, but rather its 
result or fruit, implying that by means of it they 
were injured rather than improved; and so the 
issue was not edification, which it was incumbent 
on all to aim at, but the opposite; instead of 
furthering, it hindered their communion with 
their Lord and with each other.* 

Vers. 18, 19. For first of all_—mparov 
μέν is followed by no ἔπειτα dé, just as is the 
case in Rom. i. 8; iii. 2. Accordingly the second 
matter of rebuke many think they find in ver. 20, 
introduged by οὖν, therefore, because this is to be 
regarded as a result of the “‘schism”’ spoken of 
in the next clause. What, then, does he mean by 
these ‘‘schisms?”’ Is it what he more fully dis- 
cussed in chapter i. 11ff.? Were this so, could 
he have alluded to them here in so incidental a 
manner? This is hardly possible; for he must 
then have had in mind certain reports of their 
schismatic ways in their church assemblies dif- 
ferent from that particularly specified in ver. 20, 
and which ought to have been more fully de- 
tailed. The correct view, therefore, undoubtedly 
is that the second disorder which he rebukes is not 
to be found in ver. 20ff., and that in the word 
‘‘schisms”’ he only indicates generally what he 
there more fully defines, and to which the words 
‘‘when ye come together” and the ‘‘therefore”’ 
which resumes the argument, refer; and that 
there, for the first time, the proper rebuke follows 
(ver. 22). The ‘‘schisms,” then, denote rup- 
tures, disorders in fellowship of love as they ap- 
peared in the church feasts, and which he speaks 
of more fully in ver. 21. The second matter, 
then, which he has to rebuke, we are to look 
for in chap. 12, viz., the disorders arising in their 
church assemblies from an unbecoming use of 
“‘ gifts.” But the connection is loosely indicated, 
and is to be understood along the more extended 
exposition which intervenes.—When ye come 
together in the Church.—iv ἐκκλησίᾳ 
shows the form of their coming together, 7. ¢., in 
achurchassembly. To suppose a pregnant con- 
struction for εἰς ἐκκλησίαν is unnecessary; still 
less is the word ἐκκλήσια, church, to be regarded 
as denoting the place of assembling; which use 
of the term did not spring up until later times. 
Yet perhaps we might say, with Meyer and de 
Wette, that the congregation is here regarded in 
the light of a locality. —I hear.—He thus vividly 
presentiates the whole circumstance, as though 
what had been communicated to him were still 
sounding in his ears.—that there are schisms 
among you.—[These, as intimated above, are 
specifically those occurring at the love-feasts; but 
on the mention of them he breaks off to show 
that such divisions were to be no matters of sur- 
prise, but were ordained to test them. The ori- 
ginal term is σχίσματα, whence our schisms; but 
here it designates simply cligues, separated from 
each other by social distinctions and petty 





[* May there not be also an allusion here to the punitive 
consequences more fully set forth in vers. 29, 30, that in 
coming together “and eating unworthily they ate and 
drank condemnation to themselves,” and exposed themselves 
to bodily disorders and death? So understanding this clause, 
do we not here find a reason for his using the word 
παραγγέλω, which conveys the idea of a solemn announce- 
ment or proclamation, rather than the ordinary λέγω, [say 
or declare? Foy in thus interpreting to them the tokens of 
the Divine displeasure, Paul was in fact acting the part ofa 
Divine herald (ayyeAos)]. 


alienations of feeling. Those who were thus di- 
vided were outwardly still one body].—and I 
partly believe it.—The word “partly” has a 
softening effect, g. d., ‘I think too well of you to 
believe αἰ that has been reported to me.’ 

He next proceeds to assign a higher reason for 
the partial belief which he was constrained to 
give to what he heard, viz., a Divinely ordained 
necessity in the circumstances alluded to, as in- 
strumental to a Divine result, ‘‘according to 
that law of Divine administration by which evil, 
so far from hindering, is made tributary to 
good.” Burger (Matth. xviii. 7; xxvi. 54).— 
For there must be also heresies among 
you. Im explaining this passage the chief 
question is, what did Paul mean by αἱρέσεις, lit., 
heresies? The word occurs elsewhere with Paul 
only in Gal. y. 20, specifying one of the works of 
the flesh, and is one of the expressions denoting 
hostility and division. It occurs besides in Acts 
v.17; xv. 5; xxiv.5, 14; xxviii. 22, of religious 
parties or sects; and in Titus iii. 10, αἱρέτικος 
denotes one who occasions divisions in the church 
by turning aside from sound doctrine (comp. 
αἱρέσεις, 2 Peter ii. 1). ‘Originally in classic 
usage αἱρέσεις signifies nothing bad. It implies 
choice, hence an opinion, then a party, which 
arises through choice, especially in the schools. 
It came to possess a bad significance, first in 
Christian usage; and this is in consequence of 
our Christian modes of thinking and viewing 
things. On the stand-point of worldly wisdom, 
diversity of views and tendencies in regard to 
religious things is allowable; but on the Chris- 
tian stand-point it is required that every thing 
within us be subjected to one Divine principle of 
life, and be brought into one fellowship of faith 
and love.” * Nranper. In our text the current 
exposition wavers between the identification 
of the word with σχίσματα so as to make it 
imply only the divisions alluded to in the 
following context, and the later ecclesiasti- 
cal signification of the word, viz., ‘heresy ’—a 
departure from the fundamental truth of the 
Gospel, and the divisions arising in consequence ; 
thus distinguishing it from ‘schism,’ which im- 
plies a division simply in the matter of disci- 
pline. Between these extremes we give the ex- 
planation, ecclesiastical divisions, in the broader 
sense of the word [that is, divisions without any 
formal separation]. And this explanation is the 
only correct one, and suited to the character of 
the clause wherein the word occurs, which is 
only a digression by way of confirmation (Meyer). 
In this case the « ai before αἱρέσεις will mean not 
even, but also, 7. e., among other evils it is neces- 
sary that there should be also ‘heresies.’ The 
main emphasis lies upon ‘‘ must” (δεῖ), rather 
than upon “heresies,” as required by the logi- 
cal relation of this to the preceding verse.;—The 





[{* Illustrations of the early use of this word may be seen 
in GIESELER’sS Ch. Hist., Vol. I., p. 149 ff., and note 8]. 

+ [But one would suppose from the «ai that there was also 
a stress to be laid upon αἱρέσεις, as indicating something 
worse than σχίσματα, and pointing to what would continue 
to happen in the future, qg.d., ‘for it is necessary that there 
must arise even heresies among you, as an ordeal to test and 
exhibit those who are approved ’—a truth which the whole 
history of the Church has signally illustrated, as may be 
seen in the instances of such men as Athanasius and Augus- 
tine, and Luther, and Calvin, and Edwards, and a host of 
others, who have made themselves illustrious in their cor 
flicts with heresy (M. Stuart)). 


284 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ee 


objective clause, ‘in order that those who 
are approved may be made manifest 
among you,”’ involves the idea of a sifting 
process performed on the Church. ‘The ap- 
proved” (δόκιμοι) are the rightly disposed, who 
devote themselves without reserve to the whole 
body of Christian truth, and hence to the Spirit 
of the Lord; and it was necessary that such 
should be ‘‘made manifest,’ inasmuch as the 
impurity and weakness of the Christian life, the 
yet remaining power of a carnal and selfish na- 
ture, often unfolds itself in such a way that many 
cleave one-sidedly to particular individuals, and 
to peculiar kinds of talents, and to certain spe- 
cific tendencies and opinions, without, however, 
becoming distinctly heretical; although in the 
Judaistic and anti-judaistic modes of thought, 
and in the denial of the resurrection of the dead 
(chap. xv.), significant germs and leanings to- 
ward heresy might have been formed. The sift- 
ing accordingly leads, and was intended to lead, 
to a higher development of the life of faith and 
love in the Church, which had been thus ob- 
structed and disturbed. ‘The Apostle’s view 
of history thus brought out stands opposed as 
much to a pantheistic conception of necessity as 
to an atomistic view of freedom. It recognizes 
in history room for the play of freedom, yet at 
the same time asserts the guidance of a higher 
law.” Neanper. [‘*The Church has been con- 
strained by the rise of heresies to search Scrip- 
ture more carefully; and thus heresies have 
served as occasions for bringing forth more fully 
the articles of faith in her creeds.’’ WorpsworTH. 
«But the advantage here spoken of we ought not 
to ascribe to heresies, which, being evil, can pro- 
duce nothing but what is evil, but to God, who, 
by His infinite goodness, changes the nature of 
things, so that those things are salutary to the 
elect, which Satan had contrived for their ruin. 
The cause here implied is the secret counsel of 
God, by which things that are evil are overruled 
in such a manner as to hayea goodissue.” CaL- 
vin ].—Vvy. 20, 21. In these verses Paul intimates 
that what transpired in their Church assemblies 
rendered the celebration of the Lord’s Supper 
impossible; and then he states more definitely 
wherein the inconsistency was to be found; so 
that this appears as explaining and confirming 
what is before asserted. —When then ye come 
together,—[‘ Verse 19 being an interruption, 
the connection with ver. 18 is resumed by the 
particle οὖν, then.’?]—into one place.—ézi 
τὸ αὐτὸ is to be construed locally (Acts vii. 15; 
ii. 1), and denotes the place where the Church 
assembled. [From this some have inferred that 
the Corinthians had already come to have a room 
or building particularly set apart for religious 
services].—(it) is not.—Some translate οὐκ 
ἔστιν, this is not; [referring to what they did 
on coming together, and which he goes on to 
specify]; but then τοῦτο should have been ex- 
pressly given as the subject. Lit.: ‘there is no 
such thing as your eating,’ ἡ, ¢., ‘it is impracti- 
cable,’ ‘impossible ;’ not, however, from lack of 
bread and wine (Bengel), but because there was 
a lack of the requisite disposition. An accusa- 
tive before the infinitive is here not necessary. 
[Bloomfield detects a sarcastic point in this sen- 
tence, g. d. ‘To eat the Lord’s Supper surely is 





not, cannot be the purpose of your meeting (since 
that you do not eat): for your meal is not com- 
mon, but separate; every one eats his own Sup- 
per’ ].—to eat the Lord’s supper.—xvpiaxdy 
δεῖπνον, ‘a feast appertaining to the Lord,’ or 
as Osiander says, ‘‘one consecrated to the Lord 
and instituted by Him.” (Comp. κυριακὴ ἥμερα, 
Rev. i. 10). By this the Apostle designates 
neither the agapae (Jude 12), the so called 
church feasts, [as Romanists interpret who would 
thus elude the argument furnished by this 
passage against their sacrificial theory of the 
Eucharist]; nor yet, the Holy Supper (ver. 
23) by itself; but the combination of the two* 
as it was to be found in Christian Churches, ae- 
cording to the original Apostolic custom, and in 
accordance with the first institution of the Sup- 
per, which, as we know, followed upon a regular 
meal. The ‘‘Supper” spoken of in the text was 
a festival, to which each one contributed a por- 
tion, and which concluded with the Lord’s Sup- 
per proper. That, however, which was brought 
by individuals, was to have been enjoyed in 
common, so that the fellowship of love, unbroken 
by social distinctions, might be the more clearly 
exhibited. Thus was the agape, or love-feast, a 
suitable preparation for the Lord’s Supper, in 
its more restricted sense, where all ate of one 
bread, and drank of one cup. But in Corinth: 
such a meal as this, where all appeared as one 
family living on a common property, could not 
take place; since by reason of the cooling of 
their love, each one kept and enjoyed for him- 
self the portion which he had brought [accord- 
ing to the heathen custom of the épavoi—see 
above]; so that the distinction between the rich 
and the poor, which ought to have melted away 
in Church communion, re-appeared—and this to 
such a degree that while one class suffered from 
a sense of want, others were satiated to a de- 
gree which, in some cases, amounted even to 
drunkenness.—For in eating—év τῷ φαγεῖν 
is not to be taken as defining more fully the pre- 
ceding verb, προλαμβάνει; but it is simply 
anote of time, g. d., ‘ while eating.’—-every one 
—viz., who has brought something with him.— 
takes before other—rpoiau βάνει, a suita- 
ble expression for the selfish and hasty appro- 
priation of what had been brought without wait- 
ing to put all together and divide it for the com- 
mon good.—his own supper. [In contrast 
with the Lord’s Supper, and this in the Lord’s 
House, and not in his own private house. The 
abuse seems to have grown out of the primitive 
practice of sometimes annexing the love-feast to 
the Holy Communion. And here, in this case 
the former seems to have crowded the latter al- 
most entirely aside, and the natural want was 
gratified to the overlooking of the spiritual 
need].—and one hungers and another is 
drunken.—yvedier [The use of this word 


*{Such an extension of the meaning of the term is alto- 
gether unwarranted and wholly needless. The Lord’s Sup- 
per properly can only mean that particular ordinance which 
was instituted by our Lord, viz., the solemn participation of 
the bread and the wine, as the memorials of His death. This 
was ever kept distinct from the agape, althongh connected 
with it, until at a later period they were entirely separated. 
Wordsworth says, that “the non-insertion of the definite are 
ticle τὸ before κυριακὸν δεῖπνον, Lord’s Supper, shows 
that by habitual use in the Church this term had Bow at 
tained the force of a proper name’”’). 





CHAP. XI. 17-34. 


235 





in John ii. 10 shows that it need not be always 
taken to denote intoxication; but this is its 
natural meaning in most passages, and there is 
no need of softening it here.* As Meyer says, 
*s Paul draws the picture in strong colors and 
who can say that the reality was less strong?” 
“Τὶ is wonderful and well nigh portentous that 
Satan could have accomplished so much in so 
short atime.” CALVIN]. | 

Ver. 22. The blame just indicated is here sus- 
tained.—For, have ye not houses to eat and 
to drink in ?—4. d., ‘if this is what you have 
to do, viz., to hold your private meals, why, you 
have your own houses for this object. To use 
the assembly of the Church for such a purpose is 
needless. —Or despise ye the church of 
God and shame those who have not ?— 
A second reason for the blameworthiness of their 
conduct—the disparaging of the Church of God, 
whose meetings were abused to festivities derog- 
atory to its holy character by the introduction 
of secular distinctions there, and by the contemp- 
tuous treatment of the poorer members of the 
Church—a course of conduct which involved a 
disparagement of the Church in its members; 
inasmuch as these were shamefully thrust into 
the back-ground by reason of a difference which 
ought to have led only to an equalizing distribu- 
tion of the good things in the fellowship of a 
holy love. These two reasons are closely con- 
nected.—The term ‘‘Church”’ is not to be inter- 
preted locally,7 as is plain from the adjunct “ of 
God.” It stands first, because of the emphasis 
(‘‘the Church of God,” His sanctuary, His tem- 
ple); on the contrary, in the second clause the 
stress lies on the verb, ‘‘despise ye.” [τοὺς 
μὴ Exovrac—those not having. There is a 
question as to what is the real object of the par- 
ticiple here which must besupplied. Alford, and 
others, say, ‘‘ houses to eat and to drink in,” 
and suppose that in this fact we have the rea- 
son ‘for their coming to the love-feast to be fed. 
But Meyer, Stanley, Hodge, and others, construe 
the phrase more generally.’ Those ‘not havy- 
ing” are those who have nothing, and are the 
poor in contrast with the rich. This is both 
consistent with Greek usage and gives a better 
sense].—What amItosay to you? Shall 
I praise youin this? I praise you not.— 
The rebuke here is couched in mild expressions, 
anditsinterrogatory form is calculated to awaken 
reflection. There is, however, a sharp rap in 
the concluding words, which is, in fact, very 
severe. In saying “1 praise you not,” he refers 
back to ver. 17 (comp. Osiander). 

Ver. 23. The concluding question of the pre- 
vious verse implies an answer in the negative, 
and this is now confirmed by a reference to the 
original institution of the Supper, wherein its 
character and worth are clearly set forth, even 


* [Is not this a valid argument in proof of the fact that 
the wine used at the Lord’s Supper in the primitive chnrch, 
ree ‘as could intoxicate? See Bib. Sac. for 1843, p. 


+ (Wordsworth, however, takes this text as “a proof of 
the setting apart of places for God’s worship in primitive 
times, and of the reverence due to them as such.” And he 
refers to Joseph Meade’s Essay on this text, for evidence col- 
lected on this matter, and also to Hooker V.12,5. And cer- 
tainly the contrast here drawn between the private house 
and the place of church meeting, seems naturally to suggest 
the local interpretation of the word church]. 








as he himself had received it by reliable tradi- 
tion, coming directly from the Lord, and had se 
transmitted it to them.—For I received from 
the Lord.—_rapéiaBov ἀπὸ τοῦ Kkvupiov.. 
The sense in which these words are to be taken, 
is very questionable. Are we to understand 
them as implying a direct, special revelation to. 
Paul of the circumstances of the institution (for 
the text says nothing of a mere confirmation of 

testimony otherwise received, or of any special 
illumination respecting the significance of the: 
circumstances)? if so, was it by means of a 
vision (as Tholuck, Olshausen, Osiander sup-- 
pose) ? or, as a tradition starting from the Lord,. 
and transmitted to the Apostles? The first sup- 
position is supported, not indeed by the force of 

the verb παρέλαβον, I received, but by the 
force of the prep. ἀπ 6, from, which implies [a. 
remote source, | an indirect derivation ; [instead. 
of which παρά would have been more likely to be= 
used, had he intended a direct communications 
(Winer, P. III., 2 47)]; as well as by the inter-- 
nal probabilities of the case, since he could have- 
resorted to an accurate tradition of the whole: 
circumstance. The seccnd supposition is opposed. 
by the force of the pronoun ἐγώ, J, standing: 
out prominently ; since indeed, according to this. 
supposition, Paul would only have placed him- 

self on an equality with all others who had, in: 
like manner, received the Apostolic tradition; 

[whereas he here brings himself specially into. 
view, as one who had derived his knowledge from 
original sources, and had the right to speak 
authoritatively in the premises]. We might sup- 
pose with Meyer, Ed. 2, that this important cir-. 
cumstance had been accurately communicated 

to him through Ananias, or some other person,,. 
in obedience to a special commission of the Lord, 

and that this communication was made to him 
with the understanding that the Lord had given- 
a special commission for him in this particular 

by means of a vision. This might have been; 
connected in some way with his baptism, or with 

those special disclosures which he had received: 
in relation to his future calling. Or we may 
suppose (according to Meyer, Ed. 3), that since, 

in consequence of its essential.connection with. 
the Gospel, and indeed with the fundamental’ 
doctrine of Paul concerning the work of atone 

ment, the whole subject excluded human inter 

vention according to Gal. i. 12, 16, the commu-- 
nication was made in some indefinable manner,, 
either through the inspiration of the Spirit, or. 
through the manifestation of angels, or in ecsta-- 
tic vision. [Hodge argues with great force in. 
favor of a direct derivation, and shows conclu- 
sively that this is invalidated neither by the use. 
of ἀπό, nor by the supposition that no special: 
revelation was necessary, on the ground that. 
the facts connected with. the institution were- 
generally known; nor yet by the assumption. 
that not historical facts, but only ideas and: 
truths, may be communicated by visions and in- 
ward influences; but that, on the contrary, it is. 
required by the context, and isin harmony with 
what Paul elsewhere claims for himself. He con- 
cludes: ‘‘It was not only of importance for the 
Corinthians, but for the whole Church, to be 
assured that this account of the Lord’s Supper 
was communicated immediately by Christ to the 


236 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Apostle. It shows the importance which our 
Lord attributes to this ordinance”’].—what I 
also delivered unto you,—T[i. e., during his 
ministry among them; so that he is here only re- 
minding them of precious instructions.—On the 
following words Stanley well remarks: ‘They 
form probably the earliest record of the institu- 
tion of the Eucharist, and they contain also the 
earliest recorded speech of our Lord. To explain 
them at any length, or to adjust their relation to 
the other three verses in St. Matthew, St. Mark 
and St. Luke, would be to encroach upon ques- 
tions belonging only to the Gospel narrative ; 
yet those who are familiar with those questions, 
will observe: 1. That their almost exact coin- 
cidence with the account in St. Luke, is impor- 
tant, as confirming the tradition of the author 
of that Gospel being the same as the companion 
of St. Paul. 2. That in this, the most ancient 
record, of certainly one of the most important 
speeches of our Lord, it is possible to discern 
elements of the discourses in St. John’s Gospel, 
viz., Vi. 85-58; xv. 1-6. 3. That even in the 
four extant versions of this short passage, there 
are yet verbal variations of such an extent as to 
show that it was the substance, rather than the 
exact words, which the Apostle and the Evange- 
lists aimed at producing. 4. That there is all 
the appearance of a familiar and fixed formula, 
especially in the opening words. 65. That it 
implies on the part of his hearers a full 
acquaintance with the history of the Betrayal 
and Passion.” ].—What he had received by 
means of such a revelation, and had also 
imparted to them, is—that the Lord Jesus 
—(a solemn expression intimating His su- 
preme dignity, and His character as Saviour)— 
in the same night in which He was being 
betrayed.—7 apedidoro, Imp., indicating that 
the scheme of betrayal was still in progress, and 
not yet fulfilled when He performed this act. By 
this circumstance the touching and affecting na- 
ture of the transaction is more prominently 
brought to view in contrast with the trifling cha- 
racter exhibited by the Corinthians at their love- 
feasts. It was the last transaction of our Lord 
just before encountering death, by means of which 
He intended to set forth what immediately 
‘awaited Him, and also establish a solemn memo- 
rial of the sacrifice which He was about to make. 
[‘ There is,” says Stanley, ‘‘an appearance of 
fixed order, especially in these opening words, 
which indicates that this had already become a 
familiar formula’’].—Took bread—daprov a 
loaf—the last of the passover meal yet remain- 
ing. [51 was the thin passover bread of the 
Jews. But as no partof the significancy of the 
rite depends on the kind of bread used, as there 
is no precept on the subject, and as the apostles 
subsequently in the celebration of the ordinance 
used ordinary bread, it is evidently a matter of 
indifference what kind of bread isused. It was, 
however, for a long time a subject of bitter 
controversy.” Hopver].—And having given 
thanks.—That this included praise for divine 
grace manifested in the work of redemp- 
tion, is to be assumed from the nature of the 
transaction; and it was naturally suggested by 
the preceding Passover meal which commemo- 
rated the deliverance of Israel. [In Matt. and 





Mark the expression is, ‘‘having blessed it;’”’ but 
in Luke the same word is used as here. Both ex- 
pressions mean the same thing, and declare the 
act of consecration by a grateful acknowledgment 
of God’s mercy, and invocation of His blessing— 
as the two are united in the ‘‘ grace said” before 
meals]. He brake it.—[‘‘ This circumstance is 
included in all the accounts; in those of Matt., 
Mark, and Luke, as well as in Paul’s. This is 
one of the significant parts of the service, and 
ought not to be omitted as is done by Roman- 
ists, by the Greek Church, and by Lutherans.” 
Hovar].—And said—[‘ The words uttered by 
our blessed Lord are differently reported. The 
proper inference from this diversity is, that 
the words were uttered; but as the ideas which 
they express were sufficiently indicated by the 
gesture of reaching the bread to His disciples, 
they were omitted by some of the narrators as 
unnecessary. The idea, however expressed, is 
of importance. The bread was to be taken and 
eaten; there must be a distribution of the ele- 
ments to those participating in the service. 
Otherwise it is not a communion, as it is not in 
the Romish Mass where the priest alone eats the 
consecrated wafer.” —Hopas ]|.—This is my 
body that for you.—With these words he sig- 
nifies the act of breaking that had just taken 
place. ‘This,’ which has just been broken, 
“615 my body;’’ and the object of this He at once 
defines—r6 ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν se. ὄν., ““ which is or 
suffices for your salvation,” namely, by reason of 
this, that in it is fulfilled what the breaking of 
the bread indicates, to wit: violent dissolution 
and breaking up. This thought is expressed in 
the apparently well-attested, yet undoubtedly in- 
terpolated expression ‘broken,’ instead of which 
some authorities have ‘given,’ borrowed from 
Luke. Meyer in 8d Edition speaks of it, ‘as the 
calm utterance of deep earnest feeling excited by 
-the occasion.’ The symbolic character of the 
words is almost unmistakable, although we are 
not at liberty to translate é¢rev signifies, or yet 
μου τὸ σῶμα the tokenof my body. He means to 
say ‘this bread is my body, intended for your 
salvation, inasmuch as the breaking of it exhi- 
bits the slaying of my body which redounds to 
your salvation.’ That itis not, however, a mere 
memorial, but a token which offers, imparts, and 
therefore carries the fact in itself, and so is a 
means of communicating, and a conveyance of 
the same cannot be proven from the words of the 
institution itself. This thought is first obtained 
through the authentic apostolic exposition in 
chap. x. 16. We recognize in this the interpre- 
tation given by the spirit of Christ, which per- 
petually works in the unfolding thoughts of 
Christendom, and which has obtained in the sub- 
stance of the Lutheran article of doctrine an es- 
sentially correct expression—while the Romish 
doctrine of transubstantiation carries the appear- 
ance of fancy; and the exposition of the Re- 
formed Church in its various modifications, in 
part, presses a dry exegesis too far, and, in part, 
stops with a rationalizing separation of the mat- 
ters involved, and does not attain to a truly 
Christianlike intuitive union of them, inasmuch 
as it produces nothing more than the conception 
of an ideal or symbolic means of communication, 
to wit: that the bread presentiates the body of 


CHAP. XI. 17-34. 


237 


,.-- τ ττττ-τὃὃ66Θ᾽. ,»υ5.-.---ςς-ς-ς-ς-ςςς---ρ-.--.--ἐ--ς-- 


Christ to the believers, and is the pledge of ἃ re- 
demption achieved for them, and so mediates 
the operation of the Holy Spirit which con- 
temporaneously with their physical partici- 
pation effects a union with the heavenly life of 
Christ.*—Do this in remembrance of me.— 
This injunction, on the one hand, exhibits to us 
the subjective side of the ordinance, to wit, that be- 
lievers should do this which He was now doing, 
t. e., should break the bread with thanksgiving 
and divide it, in order to realize more vividly the 
sacrifice which He in His own person was about 
to make for them; on the other hand, it gives us 
to understand that our Lord wished to have this 
ordinance continually observed to all future time. 
That this is the import of the injunction is shown 
more clearly in ver. 25, where, in presenting the 
cup, He says, ‘this do, as oft as ye drink of it, 
i. e., as often as ye hold communion with one 
another through the cup” (Meyer), [showing 
plainly the perpetuity of the rite]. Others, how- 
ever, make the words ‘do this” mean the simple 
receiving of the elements at the time ; which, in- 
deed, both in itself and in relation to what fol- 
lows, would be suitable enough, but here, where 
the words ‘‘take, eat,” are not to be retained, it 
is hardly to be supposed. [The import of the 
command, then, is nothing less than the imposing 
of a solemn duty upon the church, to be per- 
formed until it should meet to drink anew with 
our Lord in His Father’s kingdom; and the 
prime object of the observance is remembrance— 
a remembrance, however, which implies the real 
representation to their minds and hearts of their 
risen yet omnipresent Lord. ‘The bread is His 
body because it assuredly testifies; that the body 
which it represents is held forth to us, or because 
the Lord, by holding out to us that symbol, gives 


ἜΣ [ἐς ΤῊ flesh profiteth nothing; it is the Spirit that 
quickeneth,” saith our blessed Lord. And herein we have 
a key to the interpretation of the sacrament before us. 
Whatever benefit we derive from the bread and wine, must 
then be by virtue of the Spirit, who being then present, 
does, in and through the symbols that set forth to our 
senses the great sacrifice of our redemption, take of the 
things of Christ, and so show them to our spirits that we, 
through those faculties and powers of the soul, which alone 
can deal with the spirit, do feed on Christ—do come into 
veritable communion with our risen Lord—do have our 
whole being—body, soul, and spirit—quickened and sancti- 


fied, and eventually glorified by that Eternal Life which in- 


Him clothed itself in our nature for the sake of effecting 
this very object—so that we are grafted into His mystical 
body, “become partakers of His Divine nature” in its 
entireness, and are prepared to unite with Him in glory at 
the resurrection. We are joined to Christ’s body and assim- 
ilated to it, not by the mere process of eating and drinking 
the elements, which are either transubstantiated into, or 
consubstantiated with, His flesh and blood; but by the faith 
which receives through the Spirit the life-giving power of 
that sacrifice which is represented and sealed to us through 
them. As Calvin says: “Christ's body is not received as 
dead or even inactive, disjoined from the grace and power 
of His Spirit.” A great mistake is made when body is con- 
founded with “ flesh and blood,’—elements which Christ no 
longer possesses, and of which it is said that they “shall 
never inherit the kingdom of God.” We partake of the 
bread and wine, first,as the symbols of a sacrifice made once 
for all, and which is not to be repeated continually (as the 
Romish theory would have it); and then, as the condition of 
uniting with and becoming conformed to Christ’s glorified 
body, which is now in Heaven, where He is, the Head and 
Representative of the whole Church, transforming, sustain- 
ing and gathering unto Himself all who truly believe on His 
name, and receive His Spirit.—On this whole subject consult 
Hooker, B 5, Chap, 67: Epw. Irvine, Coll. Writt., Vol. 2; Ca- 
vin’s Institutes, B. 3, Chap. 11. 18; Kirto’s Ezerc. Art. Lord’s 
Supper ; Smitu’s Dict. of the Bible, ditto; Herzoc, Real. Enc. 
Art. Abend-Mahl.; Bib. Sac. for 1843, p. 584f; also for 1844, 
pp. 111, 228]. 


us at the same time His own body; for He is not 
a deceiver, to mock us with empty presentations.” 
Catvin.]. Less simple are the words employed 
in the distribution of the cup which was passed 
around after the Passover nad been concluded. 
In like manner the cup after He had 
supped.—[An intimation that the cup ought to 
be separated from the common meal. (BENGEL.)]. 
Saying, this cup is the new Covenant 
in my blood.—He does not say merely ‘this is 
my blood.” That which in Matthew and Mark 
is added to the words ‘‘my blood” by way of 
further qualification, viz: ‘of the new Cove- 
nant,” is here joined directly with ‘‘ this cup” as 
a predicate—‘‘this cup is the new Covenant;” 
and as a further qualification there is added ‘in 
my blood,” in accordance with Luke’s narrative 
which almost literally agrees with that of Paul, 
and was no doubt derived fromit. The words 
‘‘in my blood” are related either to ‘the new 
Covenant,” so that the clause shall mean “the 
Covenant which is established in my blood”—a 
construction which conflicts with the absence of 
the article which is here indispensable, especially 
since ἐστί intervenes: or it may be connected 
with the whole clause, g. d., ‘‘this cup is the 
New Covenant in virtue of my blood.” In other 
words, His blood is that whereby the New Cove- 
nant was established, in so far as this Covenant, 
in distinction from the Old Covenant of the law 
(the institution of which is described in Ex. xxiv. 
8 in the very same terms), is the Covenant of 
grace, i. 6., of sin-forgiving love. And this for- 
giveness was mediated through the shedding of 
His blood, through His holy self-sacrifice which 
is at once the sacrifice of the Covenant and of 
expiation (comp. Osiander, and in reference to 
the New Covenant Matt. xxvi. 28; Heb. viii. 8; 
Jer. xxxi. 31 ff.).—‘‘A.adjxq properly denotes an 
ordinance or institution in general, then an agree- 
ment, α covenant, an institution which establishes 
a mutual relation between God and men.”’* 
NEANDER.—The cup then, with the wine it con- 
tains, symbolizes the New Covenant, and this 
Covenant is established in the blood of Christ, 
which the wine, poured into the cup and poured 
out of it for their participation, sets forth as shed 
for the expiation of sinful men and to be appro- 
priated by those who drink of thecup. ‘Accord. 
ing toa very common metonymy the cup here 
stands for the wine—the thing containing for the 
thing contained.” Sreupen. ‘‘ The wine, as the 
symbol of the blood of Christ, is the symbol of 
the New Covenant, and of our participation in 
it. But this is the more significant as it is a real 
symbol, z. ¢., the ‘wine of blessing (x. 16) is the 
communion of the blood of Christ,’ as the chan- 
nel or means by which it is communicated.” 
Kurrz.—The thing treated of here is a covenant 
—a relation between God and man resting upon 
promise, and not simply a fellowship among 
guests at a table united as brethren in Christ, 





Ἐ [ΤῈ is to be regretted that the translators of the English 
version have followed the vulgate in uniformly translating 
διαθή κη by testament (testamentum), a meaning it nowhere 
has, save in Heb. ix. 15 ff. (and that it acquires by a subtle 
turn of the thought, without, however, altogether surren- 
dering its original signification), and which greatly obscures 
the sense of the passages when it occurs. On “the import 
and use”’ of this word see FAIRBAIRN’S Hermeneutical Manual 
pp. 338-851.] 


238 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 


nn nd Udy “““͵“;“͵ ; οἝ.οςς--. 


whose union is symbolized by the wine contained 
in one cup (Schultheiss); although such a fel- 
lowship does indeed result from the Covenant.— 
The Covenant is called ‘‘new,” not merely to 
indicate a relation of time, but of character also, 
it being different in kind from the ‘‘old” (Jer. 
xxxi. 81 ff.).—The various accounts given by the 
Evangelists and Paul agree essentially, and sup- 
plement each other. It is also conceivable that 
during the presentation of the bread and distri- 
bution of the cup, the Lord in various ways ex- 
pressed the significance of the act, or the funda- 
mental ideas embodied in the institution. 

Ver. 26.—Here follow the words not of Jesus, 
but of Paul, explanatory of the injunction: ‘‘do 
this in remembrance of me,” by a reference to 
the actual practice of the church which confirmed 
it.—For as often as ye eat this bread and 
drink this cup ye do proclaim the Lord’s 
death.—In place of the word ‘‘remembrance” 
we have here the word ‘‘ proclaim” (katayyéA- 
4ere) representing the Supper as a solemn litur- 


gical exhibition of the fact that the Lord suffered’ 


a sacrificial death in behalf of His church, and 
thereby achieved their redemption—just as there 
was a proclamation or ‘‘showing forth” of the 
deliverance of Israel at the Passover. [‘‘ These 
words are emphatically introduced in order to 
introduce the continuance and identity of the 
original meal through its subsequent celebra- 
tions.” Sraniey.].—We have here, however, no 
injunction; hence the verb καταγγέλλετε is 
not Imperative but Indicative. The ‘‘proclama- 
tion” is that confession with thanksgiving which 
is connected with the rite itself, and being made 
in its very terms and forms, whether it proceed, 
in individual cases, from a heart penetrated by 
the love of God or not. The repetition of the 
words ‘‘as often as ye drink ”’—thus echoing the 
language of our Lord (ver. 25)—is quite in Paul’s 
manner. (’Edv in vv. 25, 26, which is the read- 
ing best sustained, is an incidental form of a v 
used by the later inspired writers).—Until He 
come, ἄχρις ov £A 0 7.—The omission of the 
av here shows the time to be definitely fixed; and 
this time is the second advent of the Lord, until 
when this Supper shall continue to be observed 
as the compensation for His absence and the 
pledge of His return. [‘‘This remembrance is 
of the closest and most vivid kind, like the re- 
membrance by children of parents, by a wife of 
her husband, by a brother of brother, united with 
faith, love, desire, hope, joy, obedience, and sum- 
ming up the Christian condition. This relation 
is in force from the close of the last feast with 
His disciples till His coming (Matt. xxvi. 29). 
Thus this mystery unites the extremes of the two 
periods or dispensations.” ΒΈΝΟΒΙ,.} 

Ver. 27-29.—From the fact that the Supper 
was a proclamation of Christ’s death, He at once 
deduces an inference (vy. 27), followed by an ex- 
hortation (v. 29) which is enforced by means 
of a threat in case of unsuitable deportment.— 
Wherefore,—since at every celebration of the 
Supper ye proclaim the death of our Lord.— 
whosoever shall eat this bread and drink 
this cup.—The particle ἢ, or, here connecting 
the two verbs (which is critically well supported, 
since καί, and, has only few authorities inits favor), 
has been the theme of no littlé controversy. The 


Romanists use it as a sanction for the separation 
of the elements, and for withholding the cup frem 
the laity; as though the propriety of using the 
cup alone might not just as well be deduced from 
it. In order to rebut their inference, however, 
there is no need of taking the ‘‘or” as equiva« 
lent to ‘‘and.” The two things are thus dis 
joined for the purpose of setting forth the guilt 
involved by unworthy conduct, whether it be in 
eating or drinking; and from this it would seem 
that in the primitive celebration of the Supper 


‘the distribution of the elements did not follow 


immediately upon each other (comp. Meyer and 
Osiander).—_Unworthily.—avaéiw¢ admits 
of various interpretations —impenitently, unbe- 
lievingly, unlovingly. ‘‘He partakes unworthily,” 
says Neander, ‘‘who does not keep in view the 
holy purport and aim of the solemnity; but treats 
it as an ordinary meal which, in its observance, 
does not show forth the death of the Lord.” At 
allevents, the unworthiness lies in a lack of living 
active faith in the atonement which has been 
achieved by the death of Christ; and this is the 
source of the various moral disqualifications by 
which the celebration of the Supper may be dis- 
honored (Meyer Ed. 8). Among these we may 
mention a selfish, unloving conduct as one of the 
chief—such conduct as the rich at Corinth mani- 
fested towards the poor, and which exhibited a 
striking contrast with the love of Christ shown 
in the sacrifice of Himself for all, and set forth 
in the Holy Supper wherein the benefits of it are 
extended to every one.*—Shall be guilty,— 
especially in the judicial sense. Elsewhere 
ἔνοχος is connected with the dative of the words 
expressing punishment prescribed by the law, 
and the complaint made, and also the crime com- 
mitted. But the latter stand at times also in the 
genitive, and this construction is in the New Tes- 
tament the prevailing one. Hereas in Jas. ii. 10, 
the object against which sin is committed is put 
in the genitive. Crimini et pane corporis et san- 
guinis Christi violati obnoxius erit: ‘shall be liable 
to the crime and punishment of having violated 
the body and blood of Christ.” But the idea is 
not that the unworthy participant is as guilty as 
if he had taken part in the death of Christ, and 
is to be regarded as one of His crucifiers. The 
connection points only to the body and blood of 
Christ as exhibited in the elements of the Supper, 
‘‘towards these he will stand in guilty relation 
from the very moment he partakes unworthily.” 
Mryrer.—This declaration holds good whether 
we suppose a symbolical or a real presence of 





[* But here it may be asked, ‘If Christ is really present 
in the sacrament, of what does the unworthy communicant 
partake? Does he actually partake of Christ himself?” Cer- 
tainly not. He shares only in that which he is capable of 
sharing in, As Calvin says: “receives nothing but the sign.” 
Or as Augustine: “he eats the bread of the Lord, but not 
the true bread who is the Lord.” Since Christ’s presence in 
the Supper is through His Spirit, only the spiritually-minded 
can there hold real communion with Him. But the unwor- 
thiness of the communicant does not destroy the supernatu- 
ral character of the institution itself. Itremains the same 
whether the communicant believes or not. So far as the ad- 
ministration is concerned “Christ’s body,” as Calvin says, 
“ig present to the wicked no 1688 than to the good: for God 
does not there represent in a delusive manner, to the wicked, 
the body of His Son, but He presents it in reality. As to 
their rejection of it, that does not impair or alter any thing 
as to the nature of the sacrament,” On the contrary, their 
guilt is enhanced by the sacred character of what they offend 
against.] 


CHAP. X. 17-84. 
6 00g Co SSS Ὡἐ-“΄π..|ὺἩἨ τΤὌἌὌ-ς-ς-Ἐ  ΄΄ῆῆ΄ῆὔὖΔΦΠὋΑΕόΊΈΡΊΓ΄ “ρ΄. 


the body and blood of the Lord. Irreverent or 
contemptuous conduct towards the symbol is in 
fact a desecration of the object symbolized. 
The guilt, however, appears in a stronger light 
when that which is unworthily partaken of is 
regarded as the very vehicle of the body and 
blood of Christ. The same remark is true of 
ver. 29. [‘ Allthat is necessary here to observe 
is, that the warning is directly against the care- 
less and profane, and not against the timid and 
the doubting. It is not the consciousness of un- 
worthiness that makes a person unworthy, nor 
yet is it any misyiving in regard to a suitable 
preparation; for although this may be an evi- 
dence of weak faith it certainly indicates a better 
state of mind than indifference or false security.” 
Hovce].—In ver. 28 Paul indicates a way in 
which this sin and danger are to be guarded 
against.—But—d é, shows the advance in dis- 
course, and turns it into a contrast, g. d., ‘but 


in order not to incur this guilt’—let a man 


examine himself,—dviporo¢ as in iv. 1, [a 
general term suited for both sexes]. The ex- 
pression δοκιμάζειν ἑαυτόν cannot mean to make 
one’s self fit; for it nowhere occurs in this sense 
not even in 2 Cor. xiii.5; Gal. vi. 4; 1 Thess. 
ii. 4; but it means to examine one’s self, and here, 
as to whether he is morally and religiously 
qualified for the ordinance. Where such exami- 
nation is not sincerely made, and is not accom- 
panied with an earnest desire to be in a suitable 
frame of mind, there a proper self-knowledge 
will not be likely to exist, nor will a person be 
likely to avoid that selfish, haughty, unloving 
temper which is so disturbing toa worthy com- 
munion.—and so,—. e., after having examined 
himself and discovered some reason humbly to 
hope that he may partake worthily.—let him 
eat of the bread and drink of the cup.— 
[‘‘The case in which the self-examination ends 
in an unfavorable verdict does not come under 
consideration, because it is assumed that such a 
verdict will lead to repentance and amendment.” 
ALrorp ].—The above exhortation he enforces by 
referring to the penalty incurred by unworthy 
communion.—For he that eateth and drink- 
eth, eateth and drinketh condemnation 
to himself,—That participation which ought to 
be to the communicant the means for appro- 
priating salvation, he converts into the opposite, 
he makes it a means of destruction, and draws 
down condemnation therewith upon himself. The 
word κρίμα does not denote an absolute dam- 
nation, but points primarily to those impending 
Divine judgments which are spoken of in ver. 
36 f—According to the ordinary text [which in- 
serts the word ‘‘unworthily”] he asserts this 
of unworthy communicants; and then adds as a 
yet further reason explaining the unworthiness 
predicated,—not discerning the body.—The 
verb διακρίνειν is translated either, to distinguish 
—in this case from ordinary food and drink, or, 
in order to escape the necessity of adopting a 
different signification from that in ver. 31, to 
judge, 7. e., in regard to the body of Christ, 
whose symbol he receives ;—in other words, to 
make a careful estimate of its sanctity and im- 
portance (Meyer). But it may be asked whether 
the legitimate signification of the word is not 
here transcended; and whether both the judging 








239 


of the body of Christ and the judging of one’s 
self, is not to be explained analogously. In the 
most important MSS. (A. B. C. [Cod. Sin.)], we 
find neither ἀναξίως, unworthily, nor τοῦ κυρίου, 
the Lord’s. But the latter words are at all events 
implied, and to be derived from the connection; 
the former, however, cannot be so readily under- 
stood. If we do not choose tosuppose (with Meyer) 
that any abuse is intended in the clause, ‘he that 
eateth and drinketh,” and regard the expression 
as merely designating one who partook of the 
sacrament simply as an act of eating and drink- 
ing (comp. vv. 22, 34), then must we translate 
the participle μὴ δακρίνων, if he does not dis- 
cern (de Wette), which is better and more ex- 


| pressive than that emphasis put upon the clause, 


‘‘he that eateth and drinketh,” and it does not 
suffer from meaningless expansion; rather it is 
made as terse as possible, since we understand 
by it eating of the bread and drinking of the cup. 
‘Not to discern the body,” is to fail of the very 
thing which should be aimed at in examining 
ourselves, viz., that we possess that frame of mind 
which belongs to him who has qualified himself, 
not to partake of ordinary bread, but of that 
which is the body of the Lord. In this case also 
we are not compelled to connect, as Osiander 
does, the words ‘‘ condemnation to himself,” with 
the clause, ‘‘he that eateth and drinketh,” as if 
it read, ‘he that eateth and drinketh condemna- 
tion to himself;’? in which case we should have 
to translate μὴ δεα κρίνων, without discerning, 
zt. e., he that eats and drinks judgment to him- 
self, eats and drinks without discerning the body. 
Such a rendering would not only be harsh, but 
also incorrect, for the sense requires that ‘‘con-~ 
demnation” be joined with the predicate. 

Vers. 30, 31. He here applies what has just been 
said directly to the Corinthians.— Therefore,— 
ἐν é€., on account of such unworthy communion, or 
in consequence of the judgments superinduced by 
it.—many are weak and sickly among you, 
and many sleep.—To suppose that the na- 
tural results of intemperance are here alluded 
to, is both absurd and contrary to the immediate 
context. Neither can we understand him to 
mean by the word ‘sleep,’ the decay and ex- 
tinction of. the spiritual life, since this word 
every where denotes natural death; and still less 
can we suppose him to mean a union of the spi- 
ritual and temporal death (as Olsh.). Rather, 
the Apostle here alludes to some extraordinary 
wide-spread weakness and disease prevailing at 
that time in the Church, and often proving fatal, 
which he regarded as a divinely inflicted punish- 
ment on their desecration of the Lord’s Supper 
(so Calvin, Neander and many others). The word 
κοιμῶνται. may be rendered, they sleep, 1. e., 
dying as a continual process. But whether this 
intended a euphonism to denote their entrance 
into rest with a hope of resurrection to life 
(Osiander), is at least very doubtful; although 
from what is said in ver. 32, we are not obliged 
to suppose the cutting off of all hope. [Words- 
worth says: ‘He does not say κεκοίμηνται, the 
term which is used to describe the peace of the 
saints who have fallen asleep in Jesus (see xv. 20; 
1 Thess. iv. 18) but κοιμῶνται, a tense which is 
less expressive of a permanent condition of rest 
than the other]. The words ἀσϑένεες καὶ 





240 


.,- τ ττι« ι  ΄΄ῇ᾿΄..--  ---ςς-ς-- 


ἂῤῥωστοι, weak and sickly, may be distin- 
guished either by taking the former to denote 
mere indisposition, and the latter severe disease ; 
or the former a chronic, and the latter an 
acute disease; or, which is indeed more correct, 
the former denotes those whose very powers fail, 
i. e., confirmed invalids; and the latter those in 
whom they are only weakened. Something ana- 
logous to these judgments is presented to us in 
y. 5; Jas. v. 15; and also in the O. T. examples 
mentioned in x. 6 ff.—In what follows he next 
gives them to understand how such judgments 
might be ayoided.—But if we would judge 
ourselves.—The γάρ, for, of the received text 
implies another view of the connection, φ. d., 
‘therefore, in consequence of the Divine judgment, 
there are many sickly among you; for if we only 
judged ourselves, then would such judgment not 
befall us.’ The διακρίνειν, judge, refers back to 
δοκιμάζειν, prove. It denotes the thorough-going 
self-condemnation which springs from earnest 
self-examination—a self-condemnation which in- 
volves self-punishment, and a thorough severance 
of the carnal from the spiritual within us (comp. 
Osiander). - Self-judgment is in fact a diagnosis 
of one’s own moral state according to the Divine 
standard of what it should be (Burger).—The 
transition to the first person serves to soften the 
exhortation, and is not to be explained (Grotius) 
on the supposition that the Apostle had church 
discipline in mind, of which the context gives no 
hint.—But when we are judged, we are 
chastened by the Lord.—The judgment 
spoken of in ver. 80 he here represents in the 
light of chastisement, i. e., the infliction of pains 
for the benefit of the individual, so that it shall 
appear as an exercise of paternal love, and not 
of exscinding wrath (comp. Heb. xii. 6-11). The 
words ‘‘by the Lord” are not to be interpreted 
of God, but of Christ, the Lord and Educator of 
the church, and they are better connected with 
‘‘chastened” than with “judged,” which, as in 
ver. 31, is used without further qualification as 
being self-evident. The cheering and encouraging 
tendency of this view of the matter appears yet 
more definitely in the final clause,—that we 
should not be condemned with the 
world.—Through such discipline, aiming at 
improvement, we are said to be guarded from 
relapsing into a worldly state whereby we, toge- 
ther with the world, ἡ. 6., the mass of humanity, 
remaining outside of the fellowship of salvation, 
and abiding in hostility to Christ and God, would 
incur damnation, 7. e., utter exclusion from the 
kingdom of God. The words διακρίνειν, κρίνειν, 
κατακρίνειν, present a significant paranomasia 
(Osiander. Meyer says ‘‘an Oxymoron”’*). In 
a friendly, winning manner he next follows up 
his rebuke with a positive exhortation. 

"Vers. 33, 84. Wherefore.—déore draws an 
inference from what precedes.—my brethren, 
when ye come together.—He here goes back 
to the point he started from in ver. 20, ‘‘to eat,” 
i. e., at the church-feast— the agape,—tarry one 
for another.—ixdéyeo¥e as the opposite of the 
reprehended προλαμβάνειν (ver. 21) means, wait, 
suitably to the N. T. usage elsewhere. [Words- 








* A figure in which an epithet of a quite contrary signifi- 
cation is added to a word. 





* 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





worth translates it receive, entertain one another, ὃν 
rendering which is forbidden by the contrast 
which it forms with προλαμβάνειν, and is not 
found in any of the versions ].—Finally he points 
to the fact that this Supper was not intended for 
the satisfaction of bodily wants, and that these 
ought to be attended to at home. This would 
serve to guard them against that greedy haste 
which destroyed the fellowship of the Supper and 
counteracted its sacred intent.—And if any 
man hunger, let him eat at home.—This 
exhortation he strengthens by referring once 
more to the judgment to which they would expose 
themselves by an unseemly gathering.—that ye 
come not together unto condemnation. 
—Having thus given the necessary directions in 
reference to the matter most urgent, he postpones 
all further instructions concerning Divine wor- 
ship and church usage, to his personal arrival. 
And the rest will I set in order when I 
come.—From this passage the Romish theology 
has sought to find a support for its tradition. 
‘‘All permanent instructions which are destined 
to have the character of Divine appointments are 
always referred back even by the Apostles 
themselves to the Lord and His Word (chap. vii. 
10; ix. 14); and hence we justify the rule that 
nothing can stand as a Divine ordinance in the 
church which is in opposition to the recognized 
and definite expressions of the Lord and His 
Apostles.” Burarr. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1. Tux Lorp’s Suprer. 1. Its authenticity. 
In Paul we have a separate and an independent 
witness to the genuineness of this institution. 
It was revealed to him as a part of that Gospel 
of which he certified that he neither ‘‘received it 
of man, neither was taught it, but by the revela- 
tion of Jesus Christ.’”” And the essential har- 
mony of his account with the narratives found in 
the synoptical gospels, while it is prior to either 
of them in the order of composition, puts both the 
fact and all its particulars beyond reasonable 
doubt. The mythical theory here finds most ef- 
fectual refutation. 2. Jts distinctive character. 
It isthe Lord’s Supper, and is therefore to be 
separated from ordinary meals as designed not 
for the nourishment of the body, but for the soul. 
It is, therefore, a suitable observance for the 
Lord’s house, and should there be celebrated 
with all the solemnity which the great event it 
commemorates ought to inspire in devout minds. 
8. Its import. a. It is a memorial of our Lord’s 
death. This it exhibits to us as a sacrifice for our 
sins. The bread betokens the body that was 
broken in our behalf; the wine calls to mind the 
blood that was shed for the forgiveness of our 
sins, and by which the covenant, ensuring to us 
eternal life, was sealed. These elements are a 
significant witness, therefore, of the atoning char- 
acter of our Lord’s sufferings and death, and 
they can be rightly received only by those who 
so interpret that wonderful transaction. 6. But 
while it is a memorial, the Lord’s Supper is at 
the same time a feast to the soul. Our Lord 
therein presents Himself to the chureh as the 
true bread from heaven which giveth life unto 
the world, and by means of which we are to eat 


CHAP. XI. 17-34 


241 





His flesh and drink His blood, so that He shall 
dwell in us and we in Him. It is, therefore, no 
empty form, but one filled with richest substance 
—a substance which is nothing less than the 
body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which it becometh 
the belieyer to discern and appropriate by a 
living faith to the strengthening of his own spir- 
itual life, and that he may be raised up at the 
last day. c. Besides, it is a festival of social 
union and communion where, in fellowship with 
their Head, believers knit the bonds of their com- 
mon membership. d. It is, moreover, a proclama- 
tion of our Lord’s death, a significant exhibition to 
the world of what He has done and is still ready to 
do in behalf of all perishing sinners. In cele- 
brating it the church sends forth its invitation 
to the world bidding every one that hungers and 
thirsts to come and eat without money and with- 
out price. 6. It isa pledge of the Lord’s return. 
As it points backward to His death, so does it. 
also point forward to that Marriage Supper where 
He, the returning Bridegroom, will entertain 
His Bride clothed in white array without spot 
or blemish or any such thing, and destined to go 
no more out from His presence forever and ever]. 

2. Tue Lorp’s Supper. .The proper method of 
its observance. The words ‘given for you,”— 
‘sshed for the remission of sins,’’—are associ- 
ated with the act of eating and drinking the ele- 
ments as expressing the chief thing in this sa- 
crament; and he who truly believes in these 
words is a right-worthy and well-qualified com- 
municant- But he who does not accept their 
truth or doubts them is unworthy and disquali- 
fied; for all that the words ‘‘ for you” require is 
a sincere believing heart.—Again, where this 
faith is fervent there the new command of our 
Lord, John xiii. 34, is observed by all the mem- 
bers of the New Covenant. The fire of this love, 
which in Christ devoted itself even unto death 
in behalf of all mankind, melts down human 
pride and selfishness. If this love of Christ 
truly possesses our hearts so that we can appro- 
priate to ourselves the sacrifice it has made as 
offered for us, then will our natural self and all 
we have of this world’s advantages and goods 
become as nothing. Christ and his love will 
be our all, and in Him will the entire worth of 
life be included for us. We shall seem to pos- 
sess worth so far as we are in Him; and every- 
thing will possess worth for us so far as it be- 
longs to Him, proceeds from Him, is His work, 
partakes of His nature, bears His impress, and 
has Him for its end.—Still further, in my asso- 
ciates I behold One who is in them, even as He 
is in me, who imparts Himself to them as He 
does to me, who loves them as He does me, and 
who is beloved by them as He is beloved by me. 
Thus, all sense of estrangedness is removed, and 
a feeling of true brotherhood is awakened, and 
a communion established wherein we freely 
share with each other what we have received 
from Christ. When believers celebrate the 
Lord’s Supper in such a state of mind, then may 
they be said to partake worthily; then are they 
in condition to receive through the bread and 
wine the all-atoning grace of Christ, and together 
with this, the might of a pure love which gladly 
forgives; which shrinks at no self-mortification ; 
which embraces all who are in Christ with a 

15 








pure benevolence and sinks all distinctions of 
weak and strong, of poor and rich, of little and 
great, in the one life of Christ which is freely 
imparted to all, and alone has and gives absolute 
worth; which accepts with pleasure the little 
from the little, and rejoices also to give without 
stint and without selfish intent, in perfect sim- 
plicity of heart, so that we receive from our 
brethren what they have in Christ and what is 
precious and costly, however small it may ap- 
pear, and give to them in turn, what we too 
have derived from Christ, both great and small, 
counting it a favor if we may but be made the 
instruments of His love.-—When on the contrary 
the heart is closed against the brotherhood in 
selfishness and disgust, and cleaves to earthly 
things of whatever kind, and exalts itself by 
reason of their possession and looks contemptu- 
ously on the rest keeping aloof from them, then 
faith in the declarations, ‘given for you”— 
“‘shed for you” is utterly impossible; there the 
person is disqualified for a living union with the 
Lord in His Supper; then does he eat and drink 
in an unworthy manner. Here then is the 
point which every one must carefully look at 
who wishes to commune at the Supper; and he 
must examine himself honestly in presence of 
the great Heart-Searcher in reference to it.— 
And only after thorough self-examination under 
the instruction and guidance of Christ’s Spirit 
must he approach the Holy Supper where the 
Lord imparts His own offered life to Him being 
vitally present through the visible symbols.— 
Holding communion thus he will be greatly 
strengthened in the participation of Christ’s sal- 
vation and be merged more completely in the 
river of eternal life flowing from Jesus, and his 
whole nature willbe quickened, refreshed and 
nourished for the more complete development of 
its spiritual powers.—But when these conditions 
are wanting and when persons approach the 
Supper in an unhallowed frame of mind, faith- 
less and loveless, then will the life so freely of- 
fered to them, instead of proving a blessing and 
a nourishment work out for them a greater con- 
demnation. The Holy Sacrament being violated 
and desecrated by an unworthy handling proves 
a stumbling-block to the communicant; his life 
pines away and perishes—an effect which not 
only took place in the apostolic churches, but 
which stretches on through all time to come ex- 
tending even to the body itself, (comp. Calvin in 
loco).—Such judgment, however, is to be re- 
garded primarily as a chastisement of the Lord 
by which He intends to bring back the un-. 
worthy communicants to suitable reflection and: 
to guard them against sinking back into the world: 
and incurring a greater damnation. From all: 
this it willseem that an unworthy communica- 
tion can only take place where through the- 
operation of the Divine Spirit a worthy commu: 
nication has been rendered possible, where a 
believing disposition has already existed so that 
the unworthiness proceeds from unfaithfulness: 
to the divine influences and from a mind per- 
versely resisting the grace of Christ. But the 
oftener such unworthy communication. is re- 
peated, the more closed does a man. become 
against rebukes of the Spirit and the more dis- 
qualified from proper self-reflection.and personal 


242 





examination and purifying self-judgment, the 
nearer also does he approach that state of com- 
plete apostasy which brings with it damnation. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL, 


Luruer.—Vers. 20, 21. No sin is so contrary 
and hostile to this sacrament as disunion and 
discord. SrarKke :—Ver. 17. The minister’s com- 
mands ought to be God’s commands. Woe to 
the minister who commands otherwise, and woe 
to the hearers who do not obey! Hep.:—Ver. 
19. God turns all things for good: the juice 
must ferment if wine is to be produced; so must 
the church be agitated by false opinions and 
abuses in order that what is evil may foam up 
and pass off. By this means we learn ourselves, 
and the hypocrite is separated from the true 
Christian (1 Jno, ii. 18f.).—Ver. 20. Oh, what 
multitudes approach the table of the Lord, not 
as they should, but as they would; by so doing 
they celebrate, not the feast of the Lord, but the 
feast of their own condemnation.—Ver. 21 (HEp.). 
The Lord’s Supper, not an ordinary meal, but a 
true Supper, where not the stomach, but the 
soul, is to be satisfied. Dost thou hunger and 
thirst after Jesus? Then it will be easy to fast 
while preparing to approach the table of the 
Lord for the sake of better devotion. But if thou 
art weak, and must needs partake of food, still 
this will not hinder the worthy reception of the 
Holy Supper.—Ver. 22. In the Church of Christ, 
and in the distribution of the Supper, one is of 
as much consequence as another; and the rich 
and the noble must not take umbrage if the poor 
and the lowly partake first.—Ver. 23. Abuses 
can best be remedied by going back to the pri- 
mitive institution of a thing (Matth. xix. 4).—If 
our Lord has instituted an ordinance, it is not 
allowed us, or the whole Church even, to change 
aught therein; for He is the Lord of the whole 
Church.—Ver. 24. He says not: ‘offer it, honor 
it, guard it, carry it about, worship it.’ Spxr- 
neR: If the veritable body of the Lord has been 
offered for us, then must the same also be re- 
ceived and enjoyed by us in the Holy Supper. 
In the inward remembrance of the Saviour there 
is an actual seeking, desiring and apprehending 
of all His grace; and such recollection trans- 
pires in the inmost depths of the soul. The 
more thou thinkest upon Jesus the happier art 
thou: the oftener, the better! (Spener)—Ver. 
25. It is real blood that Christ has shed for us, 
and indeed the sacrificial blood which he has 
offered up in our behalf, the blood of atonement 
whereby we are reconciled, and hence the very 
thing whereby he has sealed the New Testament. 
Where the cup is wanting, there the supper is 
mutilated ; for Christ did not bequeath his 
blood with the bread, but with the cup. As after 
having been born, we need food, not only once, 
but daily for the strengthening of our nature, 
80 must this sacrament, which is designed to 
‘strengthen our new nature, be frequently re- 
peated. And to this we should be urged not 
‘only by the command of the Lord, but also by 
‘& sense of our own need—hecause we crave the 
‘forgiveness of sins and spiritual invigoration. 
‘Besides we should be moved to it by the pre- 
‘eminent worth of the good things presented to 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





us.—Ver. 27. Judged according to our merits 
we are all too unworthy of food and drink, such 
as no angel has been honored with. Yet the 
super-abounding grace of our Lord Jesus Christ 
renders the lowest of us worthy of it. Those 
who approach the table of the Lord without 
repentance and faith, without reverence and 
holy resolves, without love and reconciliation, 
in short, without the perfect renunciation of all 
deliberate and presumptuous sins, offend as 
grievously against the body and blood of the 
Lord as did the godless Jews and heathen, who 
crucified the one and shed the other. (Heb. vi. 
6).—Ver. 28. Lurner: To examine oneself 
means to consider whether we are fit: hence, it 
requires that we should not trust at once to our 
own thoughts, nor to the opinions of others, but 
keep these in abeyance until the matter has been 
well investigated before God and in the light of 
his word. And for this a person should be duly 
qualified. Hence, no unconverted man can 
properly examine himself, unless he first begins 
to yield to the prevenient and convicting grace 
of God, and thus a spark of divine light is kin- 
dled in him.—Examine thyself according to the 
law, as to whether thou dost realize thine own 
sin, and the well-merited wrath of God; also, ac- 
cording to the gospel, as to whether thou dost in 
faith comfort thyself solely with the all-availing 
merits of Jesus and whether this faith in thee is 
strengthened through a hearty love of God and 
of thy neighbor—through a profound hatred of 
all sin and evil—through a holy zeal for true god- 
liness, through a high minded contempt of that 
which is seen and temporal and through a burn- 
ing desire for that which is unseen and eternal. 
If this examination be sustained, be assured 
that this Holy Supper presents you that which 
heaven and earth cannot give. (ARNDT): Prove 
thyself according to the language of the institu- 
tion wherein the great mystery contained is set 
forth to be, that it exhibits to us the true body 
and blood of Jesus—that He, as an offered body 
and as atoning blood, yea as a testament with 
all well earned treasures and gifts is truly pre- 
sented, to some for a blessing, to others for a 
condemnation. And remember also, that to be 
a worthy guest thou must be prepared by re- 
pentance and faith to be capable of spiritual 
communion with Christ and his spiritual body. 
Such are the blessed intents, fruits, operations 
of this mysterious testamentary feast of love and 
reconciliation.—Ver. 29. It happens sometimes, 
that the children of God approach the table of 
the Lord without suitable reflection and proper 
preparation. These invite upon themselves se- 
vere temporal chastisements; while the utterly 
godless, provoke a greater damnation.—Ver. 30. 
Hepv.: Why are many sick? Why do many 
die? Why domany fall? Somereply; ‘it was 
a raging pestilence’’—‘the physician failed’— 
‘we cannot avoid ill luck’.—I reply, ‘it is because 
they partake unworthily of the Lord’s Supper.’ 
God’s judgments yet endure. But who sees 
them? who suspects them ?—Ver. 31. If thou 
wilt judge thyself salutarily, keep from dissipa- 
ting vanities; refrain from treacherous self-love; 
and think not to magnify the good and diminish 
the evil that isin thee. Pray God to enlighten 
thee; and take God’s word to counsel and re- 


. 


CHAP. XI. 17-34. 





form thee in all particulars wherein thou canst 
and ought to be reformed. He who does not 
daily stand in judgment upon himself, cannot 
stand well in a state of grace. Amid many 
kinds of wordly avocations this may not be rea- 
dily done; yet the spiritual and eternal welfare 
of our souls is of sufficient importance to demand 
and obtain some time for this purpose from every 
one; and time may be easily found for it if 
we will.—Ver. 82. Behold the compassion of God 
towards the unworthy communicants at Christ’s 
table. He does not send them at once to hell; 
but searches them by means of temporal punish- 
ments, with paternal intent of leading them to 
repentance, and keeping them from being con- 
demned with an impenitent world.—Ver. 33. 
O happy fellowship, where in holy communion, 
one deems himself no higher than another, but 
rather each one thinks other better than him- 
self! (Phil. ii. 3). 

BERLENB. BrBet: Ver. 16. It is always the 
duty of Christians to meet together, but it 
should be for edification. The tendency is ever 
to backslide. Steadfastnessin the truth already 
known costs effort. By the grace of God only 
can we grow.—Vss. 18. 19. Were we to look into 
man’s condition and also to comprehend our- 
selves better, it would not astonish us to find so 
little perfect union among pious people. And 
were our hearts more simple and thoroughly 
freed from falsehood, how would we learn to 
look with others’ eyes at everything which now 
awakens, at first sight doubt, disgust and jeal- 
ousy! We readily acquiesce in the most singu- 
lar ways of Providence when we have learned 
how to bring good out of evil, and under all 
things to recognize God’s wisdom, truth, and 
blamelessness. Of many a church-communion 
at the present day Paul might well say, ‘‘How 
can ye, being unholy, have a holy table of the 
Lord? The world is full of hypocrites and 
mouth-Christians.—Ver. 23. We must first receive 
the mystery of faith from the Lord, if we would 
so transmit it to others as to awaken their rever- 
ence. Those who profess to be the servants of 
Christ ought first to have tasted of the goodness 
of the Lord, and have derived strength from His 
love, in order that they may be the holy instru- 
ments of God in bearing witness of His gospel to 
others, and nourishing them with spiritual food. 
What is to be imparted to souls ought not to be 
taken at second-hand, or delivered without being 
first experienced in the soul.—Ver. 24 ff. Through 
the apostasy, mankind have been betrayed into a 
frightful hatred of God, and into a slavish fear 
and distrust of Him. Hence they very reluc- 
tantly come to commemorate Him whom they 
regard only as their Judge, and not also as their 
Saviour and Helper.—In order to furnish weak 
and wretched souls with the guidance like that of 
a hand, Christ establishes the outward observance 
of the Holy Scriptures as His memorial—not as 
though He Himself were ever absent, since He 
has promised to be with us always, yea, to dwell 
in His own,—but because our ever forgetful dis- 
position requires such constant reminding. Yet 
at the same time He aims to make such a power- 
ful impression by means of it as shall deeply 
stamp on the heart His whole character and 
work—both what He has done and what He has 








243 


suffered in our behalf.—And this memorial is 
intended also to effect an actual reunion and 
communion with the Lord; for when a poor, 
weary soul, in its great need, seeks anxiously 
for Christ, then does He knock at the heart, not 
only inwardly, by His attracting Spirit, but ex- 
ternally also, through the means of grace, And 
if the person opens to Him his whole heart, then 
does He at once become one with him forever- 
more; and if he is of one mind with Christ, then 
is he also a partaker of Him.—Through the envy 
and wrath of Satan, have mankind fallen into a 
condition of mutual hostility and passionate 
strife.—The hellish abyss of bitterness and 
falsehood lies deeply concealed in every one, and 
the fire of self-love and self-will burns by nature 
in us all. Thence arises wrath, strife, hatred, 
envying, and all the other hellish attributes and 
works of Satan, by which God’s wrath is kindled 
in the human heart. In this hellish torment 
would man be doomed to burn evermore, had 
not Mercy found a perfect means of deliverance 
in its great wisdom.—The Son of God, as the 
manifestation of God’s heart and love, has incor- 
porated Himself with humanity, and thus have 
Divine love and grace been again revealed and, 
brought near to man. Those now who unite 
with Christ through faith become partakers of 
God’s life and love.—The new covenant is at the 
same time a Testament of the Divine promises 
which the Son of God has sealed for us with His 
death and blood. With him, who has enjoyed 
this blood in its purifying power, is this covenant 
ratified. If thou wilt then have a share in this 
covenant with God, thou must open thine heart 
to Him in order to receive His perfect will, to- 
gether with all His grace and strength. For 
this is the power of the new covenant that God 
proposes to give to His saints His Spirit, whose 
work it is to draw us to Christ, glorify him in 
our eyes, and make us strong to obtain all things 
in Him.—He who has an earnest longing to 
know Christ, and to partake of Him, will find 
but little pleasure in transitory things, and be 
little disposed to think of and cleave to them. 
For the one must give place to the other, even in 
thought.—Ver. 26. The first observance of the 
Supper is apt to be attended with the most earnest 
devotion. With time, devotion lessens. Constant 
reflection will, however, guard us against this 
evil. Our devotion ought to be ever increasing, 
and this will be the case if we so eat of the bread 
as not to forget the Lord, and devote ourselves 
entirely to each other, as the Lord has done for 
us, and thus allow the blood of Christ to kindle 
in us a holy zeal to be true to Him even unto 
death, and to stand by each other even unto 
blood, in the actual and active communion of the 
heart, and life and goods, as becometh members 
of one body. As we eat and drink with the 
mouth, so with the mouth do we also confess the 
Crucified, and incite each other to the fervent 
imitation of Him. This proclamation of His 
death involves our living as those who have been 
crucified, and are dead to the world with Christ ; 
so that we can show that we have a perfect 
Saviour actually in us, who, as our High Priest 
has atoned for us, as our Prophet, has instructed 
us, and as our Ruler, has strongly controlled us. 
—His death slays our death. His life quickeng 


244 





our life. And this we ought also to impress on 
each other: that as Christ died for us out of 
sheer love, so also ought we, out of the love 
which He has given as food for our souls, to die 
gladly unto iniquity, and to live no more unto 
ourselves, but unto God through Christ, who has 
suffered Himself to be slain in our behalf.—As 
the sacraments derive their power and active 
operation from the death of Christ, so is their 
most important end conformity to the death of 
Christ. (Phil. iii. 10). .Just in proportion as a 
person brings to mind the death of our Lord, 
holds Him in constant recollection, and thinks 
merely of His future glory, will he become dead 
to all evil lusts and desires from day to day. 
Then, when Christ comes, will He take the so- 
vereiguty, and liberate the creature from the 
curse, and from every evil which it has incurred 
in consequence of the fall. Until then we must 
hold fast to the memorials of His death.—He who 
abuses the creature in lust and vanity, and thus 
excites and nourishes lust and strengthens sin, 
poorly prepares himself for the coming of the 
Lord.—Ver. 27. He who eats and drinks without 
true penitence and spiritual hunger, or renders 
himself unworthy by sorry pursuits, so far from 
being absolved from guilt, only doubles it.—Ver. 
28. Self-examination should be carried on by a 
sharp introspection and constant observance of 
what transpires within us—of our thoughts, aims 
and desires; by watching what proceeds from us 
in word and deed; and by reflecting on what the 
issue of all these things will be before God. At 
the same time there must shine in us the light of 
the Holy Spirit, who shall discover to us our se- 
eret faults, and disclose the evil we might other- 
wise overlook. New strength must also be in- 
voked from Him for the overcoming of our sel- 
fishness. If we could only suffer ourselves to be 
examined by Him, then would questions such as 
these arise: ‘How is it with thee in respect to 
the love of God? Art not thou loving and serving 
the creature more than the Creator? Whereupon 
rests thy confidence—upon the living God, or 
upon thyself? Art not thou still constantly 
abusing the holy Name and will of God for hy- 
pocritical ends? Is there nothing false in thine 
act and on thy tongue? Dost thou not indeed 
represent thyself as more pious than thou art, 
and still performest in secret thine own will? 
Dost thou let God rest in thy heart, or art thou 
hindering Him with thine evil desires? How 
art thou dealing with God’s Word? Art thou 
employing the best of thy time for the true in- 
ward service of God? How does thy heart stand 
related to thy neighbor? Hast thou not injured 
or oppressed any one, so as to cause him to sigh 
because of thee? Is thy heart free from hatred, 
and envy, and wrath, even in the nicest particu- 
lars? Art thou disciplining and chastening thy- 
self? Art thou practising nothing, even under 
cover of marriage, which stains thee before God ? 
How art thou dealing with others’ goods? Art 
thou acting in all things honestly and truly be- 
fore God ?’—Under such searching inquiry, what 
a depth of impurity is opened up within? The 
discovery of it cannot but bow the heart mightily 
before God. | This self-examination, accordingly, 
includes in itself the whole work of repentance 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


----- ---------- 


which is demanded before the communion.— 
Ver. 29. A person eats unworthily—1, when he 
fails to recognize his own need, and proves not 
himself; 2, when he hungers not after Christ, nor 
discerns His most holy and glorified Body. Such 
base contempt of Christ justly incurs upon itself 
the severest punishments. Plagues of every 
kind then ensue—the cause of which is not often 
seen—and we wonder why this or that person is 
so severely chastised.—Ver. 30. The first inflic- 
tions are somewhat temporary, and they can be 
ameliorated by earnest repentance, so that the 
man shall not fall a prey to death. Under the 
prostration of the body, many a soul may be 
rescued. That there are, even among well 
meaning persons, so many sick and dead in faith, 
happens for this reason: were persons always 
helped, so as to go on successfully in their ap- 
pointed conflicts, and to remain looking to Jesus, 
and to receive from Him grace and victory, they 
would at once give scope to their fancy, pride 
themselves on the gifts which they have received, 
and which were given to them for the purpose of 
being industriously improved, towards making 
their calling sure, and advancing in humility. 
But instead of this, they gradually abandon 
their humility, and exalt themselves. In this 
way their field is sown with thorns by the 
enemy; yet they deem it all good fruit, eat 
thereof, and fill full their pride and self-love.— 
Much evil arises when those who are weak sepa- 
rate themselves from such as are able to furnish 
them good guidance.—Ver. 31. He who comes 
squarely up to the righteousness of God, and 
freely acknowledges himself as guilty before it, 
and subjects himself to its avenging sword by 
condemning himself, acts discreetly, and accord- 
ing to the mind and counsel of the Holy Spirit. 
For it is far more tolerable to manage our owe 
case with God secretly, and to take to shame 
ourselves, and bow before him here, than to be 
exposed to shame yonder in presence of the an- 
gels and of all the elect, and there incur His 
condemnation. A converted Christian judge 
himself alone, and trusts none less than himself. 
Such self-judgment also works in us the death of 
Christ, in that we judge ourselves as those who 
have deserved like death, yet for whom the 
Lord has died, in order that we, through His 
death, may die unto sin and live unto righteous- 
ness. How many a one would lie already in 
hell, if God, out of sheer mercy, had not taught 
him through great tribulations! 

Rieger: Ver. 17 ff. In a church of Christ 
there ought to be manifest advance from year 
to year. In the present constitution of Christ’s 
kingdom, in which power is still left to the 
arch enemy to betray, and in which carnal 
security, levity and temerity are still pecu- 
liar to men, factions and class distinctions, 
those fruits of self-formed opinions, are unavoid- 
able. Where the distinction between rich and 
poor is still maintained in the church, there it 
appears no more as it did in the upper chamber 
of the first Lord’s Supper.—Ver. 23 ff. The ob- 
servance of the Lord’s Supper falls in between 
two termini—on the one side, the night when 
our Lord’s ordinary intercourse with the world 
was broken off, and on the other His second 


CHAP. ΙΧ. 





coming, when we shall begin to eat and drink 
anew with him in his kingdom. It is therefore 
a special provision for those who, not having 
seen him yet believe.—Ver. 31. To judge one- 
self, to be judged by the Lord, to be condemned 
with the world constitute three stages, just as 
in Mark ix—to be salted with the salt of hea- 
venly discipline, or to be salted with fire, or to 
be cast into the fire which shall not be quenched. 

Hevpner: Ver. 17. Out from our worshiping 
congregations there ever depart those persons 
who are worse than when they came—persons 
who have been '>rdened and embittered against 
the word of Go..—Ver19. God’s government in 
this world aims at disclosing evil in its true 
form, but this is ever connected with the glori- 
fication of that which is good—Ver. 21. The 
holiest things are precisely those which are 
most exposed to desecration—Ver. 22. The 
presence of God and the sanctity of His temple 
ought to impress every one with a sense of his 
own nothingness and of the vanity of earthly 
things—Ver. 23. In that place where the friend- 
ship of Jesus was so bitterly requited He set up 
the memorial of His love; in that place where 
He suffered His fearful passion did He establish 
that ordinance through which He imparted Him- 
self most intimately to others.—Ver. 26. The 
Lord’s Supper should also refresh the sure ex- 
pectation of His future coming, and be a fore- 
taste of the heavenly Supper.—Ver. 28. This 
Supper demands the most earnest preparation of 
mind, wherefore it becometh every Christian to 
experience some anxiety respecting himself as 
to whether he is honoring his Lord as he ought. 
Ver. 29. A deterioration of the heart is one re- 
sult of unworthy communication.—Ver. 30. the 
physical weakness which often gets the upper 
hand of us, isin various ways asad token of 
moral degeneracy.—Ver. 81. The more severe a 
man is upon himself, the more sparing is God 


245 


» 





tains of grace and of life are flowing, and where 
the guests of the Lord are to be nourished and 
strengthened with His body and blood, in order 
that they may grow in love toward each other 
even as Christ has loved them, these people can 
never assemble only to remain as they were be- 
fore; they are either better or worse after it.— 
Ver. 26. How can the death of our Lord move 
the hearts of those who habituate themselves 
only to carnal contentions and fleshly enjoy- 
ments?—Ver. 29. He eats and drinks judg- 
ment to himself, who does not eat and drink 
blessing to himself. Therefore let every one 
see to it, that he does not eat and drink the 
judgment of the impenitent and the unbelieving. 

[Catvin. Ver. 30. If in Paul’s times an ordi- 
nary abuse of the Supper could kindle God’s 
wrath against the Corinthians, so that He pun- 
ished them thus severely, what ought we to think 
of the state of things now? We see throughout 
the whole extent of Popery, not merely horrid 
profanations of the Supper, but even sacrile- 
gious abominations set up in its room. 1. It is 
prostituted to filthy lucre (1 Tim. iii. 8) and mer- 
chandise. 2. It is maimed by taking away 
the cup. 38. It is changed into another aspect 
by the custom of partaking separately, commu- 
nion being thus done away. 4. No explanation 
is given of the meaning of the sacrament, but a 
mumbling that would accord better with a magi- 
cal incantation, or the detestable sacrifices of 
the Gentiles than with the Lord’s Supper. 5. 
It is associated with an endless number of cere- 
monies, partly trivial, and partly superstitious— 
therefore polluting. 6. There is the diabolical 
invention of sacrifice, which contains an impious 
blasphemy on the death of Christ. 7. It is fitted 
to intoxicate miserable men with carnal confi- 
dence, while they present it to God asif it were 
an expiation, and think to drive off every thing 
hurtful by this charm, and that too without 


toward him. To be sparing of self is to incur 
harm. 
W. F. Besser: Vex, 17, 


faith and repentance. 8. An idol is there adored 
in place of Christ. In short, it is filled with all 


Where the foun- | kinds of abominations]. 


C. The church in general, and the possessor of spiritual gifts in their right estimate and application. 
Cuap. XII—XIV. 


Ἰ. These gifts—their ground and aim and hence their unity in manifoldness, 
suitably to the organic character of the Church. 


Cuap. XII. 


Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. Ye know 

2 that [when, éte]' ye were Gentiles, [ye were] carried away unto these dumb idols, 
3 even as ye were led. Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking 
by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed [says, ‘ Cursed is Jesus:’ Avadena 
*Inoods],? and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, [say ‘Lord Jesus, Κυρίοσ 


246 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





--- 


4 ᾿Ιησοῦς] but by the Holy Ghost. Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same 
Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but [ministries and, διακονεῶν 
χαὶ] the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is [om. but it is, 
ins. and] the same God? which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit 
is given to every man to profit withal [for some profit, πρὸς τὸ συμφέρον]. For to 
one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom ; to another the word of knowledge 
by [according to, zara] the same spirit; [But, d:]* To another faith by the same 
Spirit ; to another the gifts of healing [healings, ἰαμάτων] by the same’ [in the one ἐν 
10 τῷ ὁ») Spirit; [But, d2]* To another the working of miracles ; to another prophecy ; 
to another discerning of spirits ; to another divers kinds of tongues ; [but, 02] to another 
11 the interpretation’ of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, 
12 dividing to every man severally as he will. For as the body is one, and [yet] hath many 
members, and [but, 02] all the members of that one® [om. that one, ins. the]® body, 
13 being [although] many, are one body: so also 8 Christ. For by [in, ἐν} one Spirit are [also 
were, χαὶ-ἐβαπτίσθημεν we all baptized into® one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles 
[Greeks, ”EAAnves] whether we be bond or free ; and have been all made to drink into 
14 [om. into} one spirit. For the body [also, zat] is not one member, but many. 
15 If the foot shall say, Because lam not the hand, [ am not of the body; is it there- 
16 fore not of the body? [it is not therefore not of the body]. And if the ear shall say, 
Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? [it 
17 is not therefore not of the body]. Ifthe whole body were an eye, where were the hear- 
18 ing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set 
19 the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And [But, δὲ] 
20 if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they [indeed, pév]” 
21 many members, yet [om. yet] but one body. And [But, d2"] the eye cannot say 
unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no 
22 need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more 
23 feeble, are necessary: And those members of the body, which we think to be less 
honourable, upon [around zeper¢depev] these we bestow more abundant honour ; and 
24 our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no 
need: but God hath tempered [combined, cuvexépacev] the body together, having 
25 given more abundant honour to that part which lacked :? That there should be no 
schism® in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for 
26 another. And whether!* one member suffer, all the members suffer with it ; or one 
27 member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of 
28 Christ, and members in particular [severally, ἐχ μέρους]. And God hath set some 
in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, 
then [after that, eze/ra] gifts of healings, helps [helpings, ἀντιλήψεις] governments 
29 [governings, χυβερνήσεις] diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? 
30 are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all 
31 speak with tongues? do all interpret? But covet earnestly [be zealous for, ζηλδυτε]. 
the best [superior, xpe¢rrova]" gifts: and yet [moreover, ἔτι] shew I unto you a more 
excellent way [way according to excellence, xa¥ ὑπερβολὴν]. 


ΟΟ “1 δ5 δι 


Ne) 


1 Ver. 2—The Rec. has ὅτι ἔθνη &c. But the omission both of dre and of ὅτι [Κ.} may be explained by the attempt 
which was made to remove the anacoluthon in the original. [Griesbach, Lachmann (who however brackets Ore) Scholz, 
Tischendorf and Alford edit ὅτι, ὅτε before ἔθνη with A. B. C. Ὁ, E. L. Sinait. about 50 cursives, the Vulg. Syr. (later), 
Sahid. Aeth. (both), Arm. Slav.and very many Greek and Latin Fathers. The Rec. (Elz.), which gives ὅτε alone after 
ὄιδατε and before ἔθνη, is sustained by F. G., a number of cursives, the Syr. (Pesch.) Copt. Arab. (Erp.), Oecum. Ambrst. 
In addition to K. ὅτι (alone) has in its favor two copies of the Slav. Theodt. (comm.) Damasc. Oecum. (comm.) and Au- 
gustine C. P. W.] The authorities in support of ὅτι ὅτε are decisive. 

2 Ver. 3.—The Rec. has xvpiov Ἴηοουν, and also ἀνάθημα Ἰησοῦν. The best MSS. have these nouns in the nominative. 

Lachmann, Tisch, and Alford favor the nominative form, not only because the external authorities (A. B. C. Sinait. 
cursives, and a number of versions and Fathers) are on their side, but because the accusative form seems an evident at- 
tempt to avoid the oratiodirecta. A few MSS. including the Vulgate have Ἴησ. in the Genitive, and Kup. "Ing. in the 
accusative. —C. P. W.] 
_8 Ver. 6.—Tischendorf, after B. L. et. al. has καὶ ὃ αὐτὸς θεὸς ὃ, but the Rec. has ὁ δὲ αὐτός ἐστι θεός. But not only is there 
a disparity between the two phrases ὁ αὐτὸς δὲ and ὁ δὲ αὐτός, but the most decisive authorities areagainst ἐστι. [The author 
would imply that it is hardly possible that καὶ 6 αὐτὸς should have been an alteration from ὁ δὲ αὐτὸς, so as to conform 
to the previous phrases, especially when the first of those phrases (τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ) remained unchanged; and that ἐστι. being 
manifestly spurious, throws additional doubt over the whole reading. Without the Ἔστι however, ὁ δὲ αὐτὸς has the sup- 
port of A. K. L. Sinait., the Ital. Vulg. Syr. (both), Sahid. and several of the Greek Fathers.—C. P. W.] 

[Ὁ Ver. 9.—The first δὲ is omitted by B. Ὁ, E. F.G. Sinait. the Ital. Vulg. Syr. (Pesch.) Clem. Orig. Eus. and the Lat. 
Fathers, but it is inserted by A. C. D. (2d and 8d hand) K. L. Sinait. (3d hand) many cursives, the Copt. Sahid. Syr. (later) 
Arab. (Par.) Slav. and nearly all the Greek Fathers.—C. P. W.] 

5 Ver. 9.—The Rec. has αὐτῷ instead of ἑνὶ following A. B. [5 cursives, the Vulg. Didym. and a considerable number 
of the Latin Fathers.} But the αὐτῷ was substituted so as to conform to the preceding clauses. [It has however for it D. 
E. F. ἃ. Κι, Sinait. the Syr. (both), Copt. Clem. Chrys. Theodt.—O, P. W.] 





ς-- 





XII. 247 


sf YT 


[δ Ver. 10.—In each case in which δὲ occurs in ver. 10, some good MSS. are found to omit it, but the weight of author- 


ity is decidedly in its favor.—C. P. W.] 


7 Ver. 10.—Lachmann has διερμηνεία, but it is not sufficiently sustained. [Alford thinks it a mistake occasioned by 
the preceding δὲς The substantive ἑρμηνεία occurs once again in this epistle (xiv. 26), but the verb usually takes the 


form of διερμηνεύω (xii. 30; xiv. 5, 13, 27, 28). 


Hence perhaps the change. 


A. ἢ. (ist hand, which also has confus- 


edly διερμηνεία γένη γλωσσῶν) have διερμενια ; B. 109 omit ἄλλῳ δὲ ἐρμ. γλωσσῶν; and C.D. (8rd hand) E.F.G. K. L, 


Sin. and the Greek fathers have ἑρμηνεία.---Ο, P. W.] 


8 Ver. 12.—Rec. has τὸν ἐνὸς after σώματος, but against the most decisive authorities. 
9 Ver. 13.—Rec. hus εἰς ἕν πνεῦμα, but εἰς is not sufficiently sustained. It was evidently occasioned by the first mem- 


ber of the sentence. 
gays: 


The reading πόμα ἐποτίσθημεν originated in an attempt to make the meaning more evident, [Meyer 
According as the sense of the words was made to refer to the Lord’s Supper or not, sprung up the reading πόμα 


(with or without cis) instead of πνεῦμα, and ἐφωτίσθημεν (spoken according to the usage of the Greeks of baptism) instead 
of ἐποτίσθημεν. The reading ἕν πνεῦμα ἐποτίσ. is sustained by B.C. Ὁ. F. Sinait. some copies of the Vulgate, by the Syr: 
(Pesch.) Copt. Goth. Aeth. and most of the Greek writers. Instead of ἐποτίσ. A. has simply ἐσμεν.--Ο. P. W.] 

10 Ver, 20.—A. C. Ὁ. (2d and 3d hand) E. F. G. K. L. Sinait. have μὲν, and it is adopted by Tischendorf and Alford ; but 
it is omitted by B. Ὁ. (1st hand), two cursives, the Gothic and Augustine—C. P. W. 

{11 Ver. 21.—Tischendorf and Alford insert δὲ, following B. Ὁ. K. L. Sinait. the Syr. (Philox.) Goth. and most of the 


Fathers.—C. P. W.] 


12 Ver. 24—Lachmann has ὑστερουμένῳ with A. B. C. [Sinait. 17, 57, 67, Melet. (in Epiph.) Damasc.] Nearly all the 
remaining MSS. have ὑστεροῦντι. [B. has τι περισσοτέρον δοὺς instead of περ. ὃ. τιμήν.---Ο. P. W.] 
[3 Ver. 25.—D. F. G. L. Sinait. anda number of versions and Fathers have σχίσματα, but the preponderance of authority 


is in favor of σχίσμα.---Ο. P. W. 


14 Ver, 26.—Lachmann has εἴ τι, but his authorities are not sufficient. 
The evidence for them is abundant.—C. P. W.] 


second by A. B. Sinait. 


[The first ἐν is omitted by A. and Orig., and the 


15 Ver. 27—Some MSS. have μέλους ; Meyer. It was an error of some transcriber or from not understanding ἐκ μέρους. 


16 Ver. 28.—Rec. has éra. 


The weight of authority is in favor of ἔπειτα. 


[Alford thinks the Rec. a correction to a 


more usual form, and the entire omission of the word which some respectable MSS. show, an attempt to throw all into 


one catalogue.—C. P. W.] 


17 Ver. 31.—Tischendorf, and others edit μείζονα with A. B. C. [Sinait., eleven cursives, the ancient Syr. (Pesch.) and 


perhaps the later Syr. Aeth. and some Greek Fathers]; but the Rec. has κρείττονα which Meyer prefers. 


Very probably a 


change was made because κρείττονα seemed unpleasant, and on account of Chap. xiii. 18 and xiv. 5. { Bloomfield, Lachmann, 
and Alford however agree With Tischendorf that the weight of evidence is in favor of μείζονα.---Ο. P. W.] 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[‘* The ancient prophets had clearly predicted 
that the Messianic period should be attended by 
a remarkable effusion of the Holy Spirit (Joel ii. 
28). Our Lord, before His crucifixion, promised 
to send the Comforter, who is the Holy Ghost, to 
instruct and guide His Church (John xiv.). And 
after His resurrection He said to His disciples, 
ἐς These signs shall follow them that believe. In 
my name shall they cast out devils; they shall 
speak with new tongues; they shall take up ser- 
pents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it 
shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the 
sick, and they shall recover” (Mark xvi. 17, 18). 
And immediately before His ascension He said to 
the disciples, ‘‘Ye shall be baptized with the Holy 
Ghost not many days hence” (Actsi. 5). Ac- 
cordingly, on the day of Pentecost, these pro- 
mises and prophecies were literally fulfilled. 
The peculiarity of the new dispensation con- 
sisted, in the first place, in the general diffusion 
of these gifts. They were not confined to any 
one class of the people, but extended to all 


classes—male and female, young and old; and: 


secondly, in the wonderful diversity of these su- 
pernatural endowments. Under circumstances 
so extraordinary, it was unavoidable that many 
disorders should arise. Some men would claim 
to be the organs of the Spirit, who were deluded 
or impostors; some would be dissatisfied with 
the gifts which they had received, and envy 
those whom they regarded as more highly fa- 
vored; others would be inflated, and make an 
ostentatious display of their extraordinary pow- 
ers; and in the public assemblies it might be ex- 
pected that the greatest confusion would arise 
from so many persons being desirous to exercise 
their gifts at the same time. To the correction 
of these evils, all of which had manifested them- 
selves in the church of Corinth, the Apostle de- 
votes this and the two following chapters.” 
Hover]. 

Ver. 1-3. His instructions in regard to spi- 
ritual gifts, especially in regard to such dis- 


courses as proceeded from the special influence 
of the Spirit, Paul introduces by a statement of 
the chief token by which any genuine spiritual 
utterance may be known, vwiz., ‘the acknow- 
ledgment of Jesus as Lord.’ Whether he had 
been particularly questioned on this point, as in 
the instances mentioned vii. 1 and viii. 1, [and 
which are by some supposed to be continued 
here; or whether this is the second of the points 
alluded to in xi. 16, concerning which he had 
heard,] is uncertain. At any rate, what he is 
laboring for is the removal of abuses which had 
crept into the didactical and lyrical portions of 
Divine worship, occasioned by these extraordi- 
nary phenomena (comp. xiv.). ‘The Corinthians 
having turned aside from a plain, practical 
Christianity, were- employing the gifts of the 
Spirit without regard to church edification, put- 
ting the greatest value on their most striking 
features, and prizing most such as were best 
calculated to impress the senses. Hence Paul 
felt constrained to instruct them in the ‘true end 
and right use of these gifts, and to warn them 
against confounding a genuine inspiration with 
fanatical excitement.’’? NEANDER. These abuses 
have, without good reason, been put in connec- 
tion with the party divisions at Corinth, men- 
tioned in chap. i. Baur and Ribiger reckon 
those who prophesied among the followers of 
Paul, and those speaking with tongues among 
the followers of Peter; while Dihne regards the 
latter as Alexandrine fanatics of the Christ- 
party Now concerning spiritual things. 
--τῶν πνευματεκῶν is to be construed as 
neuter, according to the analogy of xiv. i; and 
is not to be interpreted solely of the gift of 
tongues [as Billr., de Wette, Stanley], concern- 
ing which he is not now speaking exclusively ; 
but of spiritual things generally, ἡ. e., of such ef- 
fects as were wrought by the Holy Ghost, whe- 
ther ordinary graces and virtues, or supernatu- 
ral phenomena proceeding from Him and belong- 
ing within His sphere. What is said in xiv. 37 
[to which Grot., Ham., Locke, allude], might 
seem to sustain the masculine construction here, 
making the word apply to inspired persons in 


248 





general (πνεῦμα ἔχοντες), or those speaking with 
tongues (γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες), provided the Corin- 
thians had been wont to designate them espe- 
cially by this term. But the predominant refer- 
ence is, on the whole, to the phenomenon itself 
(comp. ver. 31; xiv. 1, 39); and to restrict it to 
one class of persons is demanded neither by the 
allusion to dumb idols in ver. 2, nor by the drift 
of the whole paragraph, which aims to correct 
the excessive estimation of that gift.—-brethren, 
I would not have you ignorant.—Comp. on 
x. 1. He here gives them to understand both the 
subject of his instructions, and also that they 
needed enlightenment respecting the nature, ori- 
gin, worth and use of these operations of the 
Spirit. To this necessity he points in the follow- 
ing verse, where he reminds the Corinthian con- 
verts (who formed the main body of the Church) 
of their former heathen state—a state of inexpe- 
rienc? in regard to the revelation of the living 
God and the Spirit’s influences, and of a blind 
passivity in religious things—a state which dis- 
qualified them for an accurate judgment respect- 
ing these new experiences, unless carefully in- 
structed. Burger states the connection thus: 
‘the power which once influenced you as heathen 
is now broken; another influence has now poured 
itself forth upon you, of which you are made 
aware by these gifts of the Spirit. And now, be 
it understood, that this Spirit has fixed and uni- 
form purposes and signs, and does not scatter it- 
self in a variety of discordant relations and ser- 
vices such as you were involved in amid the dis- 
tractionsof heathenism. The one abiding centre 
of all spiritual operations is Jesus.—Ye know 
that when.—In the best authorities the reading 
is ὅτι ὅτε, that when. If we adopt this, we 
must either suppose an .anacoluthon here, on the 
assumption that after writing ὅτε, when, Paul 
lost sight of the ὅ τε, that, and proceeded directly 
with the following words in connection with ὅτ ε, 
when; so that the construction would be—ye 
know that when ye were Gentiles, car- 
ried away to dumb idols as ye were led— 
(ὡς av ἤγεσϑε, where the ἂν indicates what ordi- 
narily happens; comp. Passow 1., p. 156). Or, 
with Bengel, we may construe the ὡς ἂν, as in 2 
Corinthians x. 9, by tanquam, quasi, as it were, 
thus softening the strong expression ἤγεσθϑ ε, 
were led, which would then be taken in connec- 
tion with ὅτι, that, as the predicate of the main 
clause; while ἀπαγόμενοι would come in as 
a side qualification, indicating that they suffered 
themselves to be thus led. In this case the sen- 
tence would read— ‘that ye, when ye were 
Gentiles, were in a manner led away to dumb 
idols.’.—[ Alford supposes an ellipsis of τόν χρό- 
νον, the time, while ὅτε virtually drops away as a 
part of the formula, οἴδατε ὅτι, g. d., ‘ye re- 
member the time when ye were’]. At all events, 
the word ἤγεσϑε [which here expresses the main 
point to which he would call attention] indicates 
a power foreign to one’s own conscious self-de- 
termination, whether it be that of a blind enthu- 
siasm, or of some impulse of nature not as yet 
overruled by what is truly Divine, or even of de- 
moniac influence. The last agrees well with 
viii. 5; x. 20; Eph. ii. 2, and can be assumed to 
co-exist with blind enthusiasm and natural im- 
pulse. To imagine any reference to the blinding 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a πτοτα 


influence of priesteraft would hardly do, since 
there was very little of this apparent in the reli- 
gion of the Greeks. In the expression, 4 7 ay 6- 
μενοι, being carried away, we are not to sup- 
pose any figurative allusion, either as to a crimi- 
nal led to execution, or to a victim reluctantly 
dragged to the slaughter, thereby showing the 
worthlessness or the unluckiness of the sacrifice. It 
is not to this that the context points, but rather 
to the readiness with which they allowed them- 
selves to be led aside from the right into the 
wrong way—a matter which needed not to be 
directly stated in the context, but which lies in 
the very nature of the case, as the Apostle re- 
gards it, and as he teaches those whom he in- 
structed to regard it. So the term is used also 


in classic writers (comp. Passow I., p. 292). 


The idols to whose altars and temples they were. 
led, whether to sacrifice, or to pray, or to con- 
sult, are termed dG¢wva, voiceless, dumb (comp. 
Hab. ii. 18f.; Ps. cxv.5; cxxxv. 16) in contrast 
with the living God who reveals Himself by 
word, and through His Spirit imparts the gift of 
speaking in prophecy.—W herefore—i. 6., suit-. 
ably to their necessities. In order that they 
may form a correct judgment in relation to the 
Spirit’s operations, especially in relation to ut- 
terances proceeding from this source, he gives 
them the chief token of speaking by the Holy 
Ghost; and first, negatively—_no man speak- 
ing by the Spirit of God saith, ‘cursed is 
Jesus,’—i. ¢., speaking in the Spirit excludes 
all cursing of Jesus; hence, where this takes 
place, there can be no speaking in the Spirit; 
next positively,—no man is able to say ‘Lord 
Jesus,’ save in the Holy Spirit. — The 
confession of Jesus as Lord is to be attributed to 
the Holy Spirit as its source, since only in Him 
is such a thing possible (comp. 1 John iy. 2ff.). 
The distinction between the text here and that in 
John, according to Bengel, is that Paul furnishes 
a token of, the true inspiration as against the 
heathen; but John, as against false prophets. 
The expression ‘‘in the Spirit,” ἐν πνεύματι 
(comp. Matth. xxii. 43; Mark xii. 36) indicates 
the conscious exercise of our faculties in the 
element of the Spirit—a thorough pervading of 
the soul by the Spirit in the act of speaking. 
«᾽Ανάϑεμα᾽ Ἰησοῦν, anathema Jesus, is an expression 
of the fanatical rejection of Christ, suchas might | 
occur in moments of devilish excitement in Jews 
or heathen.’ ἀνάϑεμα, in its original signification, 
is the same as ἀνάϑημα, any thing devoted; but it 
is especially used in a bad sense, denoting that 
which is devoted to destruction by God, just like 


DM in the O. T., and sacer among the Ro- 


mans. In the synagogue it designated that 
which was doomed to utter excommunication ; 
hence its meaning is accursed.” NEANDER. 
[‘‘He says, not Christ, which term designates 
the office, and is in some measure the object of 
faith, but Jesus, the personal name designating 
the historical person whose life was matter of 
fact. The curse and the confession are in this way 
far deeper’’]. The idea that in the latter clause 
it was Paul’s intention to avert contempt from 
those speaking with tongues, is a groundless as- 
sumption, since no trace of such contempt ap- 
pears; aud it belongs with the arbitrary suppo- 


CHAP. XII. 


249 





sition that he here had especially in mind the 
gift of tongues. In 8 Ed. Meyer says: “Τὸ is 
possible that amid the various forms and even 
distortions of spiritual discourse at Corinth, 
public opinion may have varied as to who could 
be properly regarded as the speaker of the Spi- 
rit, and who not. Over against all arbitrary, 
ambitious and exclusive judgments on this point 
the Apostle expresses himself the more forcibly 
the broader he makes the specific sphere of spi- 
ritual discourse to appear, and the more simply 
and definitely he lays down its specific charac- 
teristic.” The expression ‘‘anathema Jesus” 
may be taken either as a wish, ‘let him be ana- 
thema,’ or as a declaration: ‘he is anathema,’ 
thus referring to the fact that He suffered death 
upon the cross as one accursed (comp. Gal, iii. 
13). Then it would essentially agree with the 
term ‘‘blaspheme” in Acts xxvi. 11. The con- 
trast with this extreme of unbelief is given in 
the key-word of faith ‘‘Jesus is Lord,” wherein 
the Messiahship of Jesus is acknowledged, and 
that too as a dignity divine (comp. Rom. x. 9). 
[‘‘The confession includes the acknowledgment 
that He is truly God and truly man. What the 
Apostle says is, that no man can make this ac- 
knowledgment, but by the Holy Ghost. This of 
course does not mean that no one can utter these 
words unless under special Divine influence; 
but it means that no one can truly believe and 
openly confess that Jesus is God manifest in the 
flesh, unless he is enlightened by the Spirit of God. 
This is precisely what our Lord Himself said when 
Peter confessed Him to be the Son of God. 
«ς Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and 
blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Fa- 
ther who is in heaven,” Matth. xvi. 17. Hopes]. 

Ver. 4-7. He here enters upon the more defi- 
nite exposition of his subject. After having pre- 
sented a true test of a genuine utterance by the 
spirit, he points to the diversity of the spirit’s 
operations, which yet converge to one end, even 
as they all have but one actuating principle. The 
advance in his argument, or perhaps, also, the 
contrast between the diversity he is about to 
speak of with the one fundamental characteristic 
mentioned in ver. 3, is denoted by a d6é.—But 
there are distributions.—By διαιρέσεις is 
meant either distributions (comp. διαιροῦν ver. 11) 
which would make this clause imply that one gift 
was imparted to one person, and another to an- 
other; or distinctions, diversities (comp. Rom. xii. 
6, χαρίσματα διάφορα). Both renderings amount 
to about the same thing. The former, however, 
which ought to be preferred on account of ver. 11, 
involves the latter. [This expression is repeated 
three times in connection with three different 
classes of objects—yapiouara, διακονίαι, ενεργήματα, 
severally rendered gifts, ministries, operations]. 
But what are we to understand by these terms? 
Much the same thing? as though the Christian 
virtues, of which he speaks afterwards, were con- 
templated from three different points of view; 
first, as gifts of divine grace, as elements of the 
new life which, with all its varied capacities, is 
mediated by the indwelling Spirit of God; se- 
condly, as ministries,—means or instruments by 
- which one member contributes to the good of an- 
other; or, as Meyer says, wherewith Christ is 
seryved—‘“‘ that same Lord to whom service is thus 
rendered,”—contrary to the analogy of the other 





— -------- -----.--.-ς-ς-----. 


clauses; thirdly, as effects in which the gifts 
manifest their efficiency? Or thus, that the se- 
cond and third classes are subordinated to the 
first—‘‘services” and ‘operations’ being the 
two characteristic forms in which the ‘ gifts” 
are exercised, and in which these exhibit them- 
selves, viz., as services in their relation to Christ, 
and as operations in relation to their effects, 
whether miraculous or not? (Meyer).—Or does 
the Apostle allude to various sorts of the Spirit’s 
operations, such are afterwards particularly spe- 
cified in ver. 8 ff.—so that by ‘‘ gifts” we are to 
understand ‘‘ the word of wisdom and of know- 
ledge, prophecy, divers kinds of tongues,”’ and 
the capabilities belonging thereto, and intended 
for instruction; and by ‘‘services,” ‘‘the helps 
and governments,” &c., appertaining to the ma- 
nagement and polity of the church (ver. 28); 
and by ‘operations,’ the miraculous powers 
mentioned in ver. 10, and the faith of ver. 9, 
among which we find the gifts of healing reck- 
oned, but which are expressly referred back to 
the first class of “ gifts,’’ showing by this very cir- 
cumstance the arbitrariness of the interpretation? 
Since the first of these methods of construction 
has also its difficulties, and ‘‘ ministries” cannot 
be included under the head of “gifts,” another 
mode of interpretation and arrangement is re- 
quired. The χαρίσματα, gifts, are qualifications 
or capabilities peculiar to Christianity (comp. 
on i. 7)—[‘‘ Eminent endowments of individuals 
in and by which the Spirit dwelling in them ma- 
nifested Himself:—and these either directly be- 
stowed by the Holy Ghost Himself, as in the case 
of healing, miracles, tongues, and prophesying, 
or previously granted them by God in their un- 
converted state, and now inspired, hallowed, and 
potentiated for the work of building up the church, 
as in the case of teaching, exhortation, know- 
ledge. Of all these gifts faith working by love 
was the necessary substratum or condition.” 
Atrorp].—‘‘ And here we must distinguish hbe- 
tween such gifts as are repeated throughout all 
time, and such as involved the supernatural also 
in form according to the peculiarity of the first 
century. Hence we see the erroneousness of 1ν- 
ving’s stand-point by whom the restoration of all 
the gifts collectively was desired for the regen- 
eration of the church, just as they existed in the 
apostolic period. But we, at any rate, will re- 
cognize in those gifts the types of such as shall 
exist alwaysin the Christian church, only, in- 
deed, in another form.”” NeanpeR. The διακονίαι, 
ministries, are the manifold offices or functions 
in the church, (understood in their widest sense) 
in which these “gifts” were employed, and 
which indicate a division in the spheres of labor 
corresponding with these ‘ gifts.” [ ‘These 
must not be narrowed to the ecclesiastical orders, 
but kept commensurate in extent with the gifts 
which are to find scope by these means, see vv. 
7-10.” Atrorp]. Finally the ἐνεργήματα, ope- 
rations are the various effects resulting from 
the exercise of the “gifts” in these particular 
‘‘ministries.” [‘« These are not to be limited to 
miraculous effects, but understood commensu- 
rately with the gifts of whose working they are 
the results.” Atrorp]. Very instructive is the 
reference of the first of these classes—the gifts— 
to the Spirit as the principle which reforms the 
inward man, and qualifies and disposes our na- 


250 





tural endowments for carrying forward the ob- 
jects of God’s kingdom, awakening, developing, 
and sanctifying them for their several uses—but 
the same Spirit,—sc., ὁ διαιρῶν comp. v. 11, who 
distributes them as He will;—and so also the re- 
ference of the various ministries or offices to 
Christ as the Head of the Church from whom its 
organization and regulation proceed (comp. Eph. 
iv. 11),—but the same Lord,—sc., ὁ διαιρῶν, 
who appoints and assigns individuals to them as 
He will; and not less that of the operations to 
the all-working God,—but the same God.— 
And He in consistency with the term ‘ opera- 
tions” (ἐνεργήματα) is represented as the one 
who worketh (ὁ ἐνεργῶν) all things in all.— 
This clause may be taken in its widest sense, as 
referring to God’s activity in the universe; or it 
may be interpreted more restrictedly, in relation 
to the gifts and ministries above specified; or, 
which might be more correct, in relation solely 
to the operations spoken of in this clause; since 
God is the efficient cause of all the effects which 
are produced by those who, by virtue of the gifts 
of the Spirit, work in the various offices of the 
church. What is here affirmed of God is not in 
conflict with that asserted in ver. 24, where God 
is said to be the one who tempers the body to- 
gether; since it is God who ordains and fixes all 
things, even what the Spirit inwardly works, 
and what Christ ordains in thechurch. Nor, in 
like manner does that which is said of Christ in 
Eph. iv. 7., that ‘‘ grace is given to every one ac- 
cording to the measure of the gift of Christ,” 
derogate from what is here ascribed to the Spirit. 
Christ is the one who commissions the Spirit 
(John xv. 26) and all the effects of the Spirit re- 
fer back to Him. [‘*Thus we have God the 
Father, the First Source and Operator of all spi- 
ritual influence in all; God the.Son, the Ordainer 
in His Church, of all ministries by which this 
influence may be legitimately brought out for 
edification; God the Holy Ghost, dwelling and 
working in the Church, and effectuating in each 
man such measure of His gifts as He sees fit.” 
Atrorp. ‘Once are these Three known thus 
solemnly to have met, at the creating of the world. 
Once again, at the Baptism of Christ, the new 
creating it. And here now the third time, at the 
Baptism of the Church with the Holy Ghost. 
Where, as the manner is at all baptisms, each 
bestoweth aseveral gift or largess on the party 
baptized, that is, on the church; for whom and 
for whose good all this dividing and all this ma- 
nifesting is. Nay, for whom and for whose good 
the world itself was created, Christ Himself 
baptized, and the Holy Ghost visibly sent down.” 
WorpswortH]. Having thus set forth the di- 
versities and the one fixed ground of these gifts, 
he proceeds to point out the one chief end of the 
manifold operations of the Spirit.—But to each 
one,—i. e., whois endowed. This stands first 
by way of emphasis. With this, again, the idea of 
diversified allotments is again taken up, but only 
as related to the unity of purpose. That which 
is given to each one He calls—the manifesta- 
tion of the Spirit,— by which the unity of the 
actuating principle is again specified. But it is 
doubtful whether the Spirit is to be regarded as 
manifesting Himself, or as being manifested. 
The latter accords with the use of the word in 2 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Cor. iv. 2, the only place where gc vépwocc else- 
where occurs in the New Testament. That in- 
this way too much would be conceded to human 
self-activity, is a groundless objection, which is 
already set aside by the use of the verb ‘is 
given,” with which also the other construction 
better suits. Whatis meant is, that each one 
manifests the Spirit dwelling and working in him 
through the exercise of gifts. [ Wordsworth 
unites both ideas. ‘These spiritual gifts are 
the manifestations of the Spirit actively, because 
by these the Spirit manifesteth the will of God 
unto the church, these being the instruments and 
means of conveying the knowledge of salvation 
unto the people of God. And they are the ma- 
nifestations of the Spirit passively too; because 
where any of these gifts, especially in any emi- 
nent sort, appeared in any person, it was a ma- 
nifest evidence that the Spirit of God wrought 
in him. As we read in Acts x. 45, 46, They of 
the circumcision were astonished when they saw that 
on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the 
Holy Ghost. If it be demanded. But how did 
that appear? It followeth in the next verse, Yor 
they heard them speak with tongues, etc. The spi- 
ritual gift, then, is a manifestation of the Spirit, as 
every other sensible effect is a manifestation of its 
proper cause ’’].—for the common profit.— 
συμφέρον denotes: the good of the Church, its 
edification. [‘‘ This is the common object of all 
these gifts. They are not designed exclusively 
or mainly for the benefit, much less for the gra- 
tification of their recipients; but for the good of 
the Church. Just as the power of vision is not 
for the benefit of the eye, but forthe man. When, 
therefore, the gifts of God, natural or superna- 
tural, are perverted as means of self-exaltation 
or aggrandizement, it is a sin against their giver, 
as well as against those for whose benefit they 
were intended.”—Hopar]. πρός as in vii. 35. 
Ver. 8-11. He here proceeds to unfold in de- 
tail what is said in ver. 7, appealing to facts as 
they existed inthe Church. Hence the yap, which 
is explanatory.—For to one indeed.—In ᾧ μέν 
—r μέν the old demonstrative use of ὅς appears 
(comp. Passow. 11., p. 1545), In what follows | 
the expressions denoting the various parties to 
whom the distribution has been made, occur in- 
terchangeably. We have ἑτέρῳ dé and ἄλλῳ 
δὲ, Since the former indicates a stronger dif- 
ference than the latter, there is a disposition to 
mark out the chief divisions according to these, 
so as to make three classes of gifts in the enume- 
ration (see Meyer). [1. Gifts having reference 
to intellectual power: 1, the ‘‘ word of wisdom ;” 
2, ‘the word of knowledge.” II. Gifts condi- 
tioned on an exalted faith: 1, faith itself; 2, 
practical workings of faith—viz,: a. healings; ὃ. 
powers; 8, oral working of the same—viz,; pro- 
phecy ; 4, eritical working of the same—viz.: the 
discernment of Spirits. III. Gifts having re- 
ference to tongues: 1, speaking with tongues; 


ι 2, interpretation of tongues*]. But shall we 


(* The following classification following the distinction im- 
plied in évep@ and ἄλλῳ is suggested by Dr. Henderson as 
tending to show the “ beautiful symmetry” of the passage: 

I. To one, the word of wisdom. ‘ 

2. to another, the word of knowledge. 
II. To another, faith. 

1. to another, gifts of healing. 

2. to another, working of miracles. 


CHAP. XII. 





assign prophecy and the discernment of spirits 
to that class of gifts which are conditioned on a 
heroic faith? This will hardly do. We will 
here state in advance our ideas of whether and 
how the classification can be made. First, we 
have two gifts evidently belonging together, or 
nearly related, vjz.: ‘the word of wisdom” and 
‘*the word of knowledge.’’—Adyoc thus rendered 
“word” means lit. discourse; according to the 
sense here, a capacity for discoursing; and the 
words in connection denote the subject matter of 
discourse. But there is a difficulty in distin- 
guishing between wisdom and knowledge. Cer- 
tainly we cannot admit the view which takes 
λόγος σοφίας, the discourse of wisdom, as= 
to σοφία λόγου, the wisdom of discourse, i. 17, and 
which interprets λόγος γνώσεως. as ‘meaning 
knowledge communicated in the simplest style. 
Rather, we might take the distinction between 
these two to be that of theoretical and practical 
knowledge. But then it would be doubtful by 
which term the one and the other was denoted. 
Paul’s usage declares for our taking γνώσις, 
knowledge, theoretically (in opposition to which 
the practical import is plainly to be assumed in 
1 Peter iii. 7; 2 Pet. 1. 5f.); but σοφία, wisdom, 
can by no means be understood in a practical 
Sense; in support of which only Col. iv. 5 may 
possibly be adduced, and also the adjective 
““wise”’ (σόφος) in Rom. xvi. 19; 1 Cor. iii. 10; 
Eph. v. 15. According to Meyer, σοφία denotes 
the higher Christian wisdom in and for itself, 
which is not to cease, even at the coming of our 
Lord; while γνώσις (xiii. 8), knowledge, denotes 
a speculative insight into truths, their philoso- 
phical exposition through the processes of the 
intellect. According to Osiander, ‘‘ wisdom” is 
the apprehension of Divine truth in its totality— 
of the aims and purposes of God, of the plans 
and operations of salvation, of the entire scheme 
of redemption in its inward connection as a well 
organized Divine system; but ‘ knowledge” is 
the clear apprehension of particular things Di- 
vinely imparted through an inward appropria- 
tion and experimental acquaintance (comp. John 
vi. 69; xvii. 3; Phil. iii. 8)—the former being 
rather the objective, extensive, all-comprehen- 
sive form of knowledge, the latter the subjective, 
intensive, and special form. Adhering now es- 
sentially to both these interpretations, we take 
“wisdom” to denote the direct intuition into 
Divine mysteries, and ‘‘knowledge” as that 
kind of apprehension which is gained by reflec- 
tion, and which therefore belongs only to the 
present dispensation. [So substantially Hodge 
and Alford. ‘According to Neander, ‘ wisdom’ 
is the skill which is able to reduce the whole 
practical Christian life intogits due order, in ac- 
cordance with its foundation principles (see 
Plant. and Train., p. 444, 445); ‘knowledge,’ 
ee OE ee OW 8S ER Ne Te 

8. to another, prophecy. 

4. to another, discerning of spirits. 
III. To another, divers kinds of tongues. 

2. to another, interpretation of tongues, 

Thus the first class includes “the word of wisdom” and 
“the word of knowledge.” Under the head of Faith—that 
is, the faith of miracles—four kinds of gifts are enumerated: 
“ gifts of healing,” “working of miracles,” “ prophecy,” and 
“discerning of spirits ;” while the third class includes “ di- 


vers kindsof tongnes,” and “ the interpretation of tongues.” 
See Hiayperson op Inspiration, pp. 185-187]. 





251 








the theoretical insight into Divine things; and si- 
milarly Olsh. and Billroth. But Bengel, οἱ al., 
take them conversely—‘knowledge’ for the 
practical, ‘wisdom’ for the theoretical. Both, 
as de Wette remarks, have their grounds in 
usage. ‘Wisdom’ is practical, Col. i. 9, as is 
‘knowledge’ in Rom. xv. 14, but they are theo« 
retical respectively in ch. i. 17 ff. and viii. 1 
Estius explains ‘the discourse of wisdom,’ gra- Ὁ 
tiam de tis gue ad doctrinam religionis ac pietatis 
spectant disserendi ex causis supremis,—as ch. ii. 
6f.;—and ‘the word of knowledge,’ he says,. 
‘gratia est disserendi de rebus Christiane religionis,. 
ex tis que sunt humane scientie vel experientiz.” 
Atrorp ].—To another—érep@ ὃ é—faith.— 
Not that faith which receives salvation in Christ, 
ἦ. 6.5) Justifying faith, but a strong confidence in 
the Divine omnipotence, or in the power of. 
Christ, as able to make itself manifest in extra-- 
ordinary deeds, or to afford and insure help of a. 
supernatural kind; or, in other words, a confi-- 
dence which shall enable a man to perform these: 
deeds or to afford this help (comp. xiii. 2; Matth. 
Xvii. 20; xxi. 21). Osiander says, ‘‘the fides: 
miraculosa, which could display itself in fervent: 
effectual prayer, also in extraordinary joyfulness - 
and confidence amid dangers and sufferings, or - 
in readiness to undergo the same. Bengel de- 
fines it as “ἃ very earnest and most present ap-- 
prehension of God, chiefly in His will as to the- 
effects particularly conspicuous either in the: 
kingdom of nature or of grace.”’ [Alford says, . 
‘‘a faith enabling a man to place himself beyond: 
the region of mere moral certainty, in the actual. 
realization of things believed, in a high and un-- 
usual manner.” Hopgse: ‘A higher measure of 
the ordinary grace of faith. Such a faith as» 
enabled men to become confessors and martyrs, 
and which is so fully illustrated in Heb. xi, 83- 
40. This is something as truly wonderful as the 
gift of miracles ”].—To another—d42 6 i— 
the gifts of healings,—. e., for healing divers 
diseases, hence the plural ἐαμάτων, of heal- 
ings. In one a capacity for healing one class of 
diseases, and in another for healing anotber 
class, by word and prayer, and the laying on of 
hands (comp. Mark xvi. 18; Acts iv. 18, év).—and 
to another—aA/’ di—the workings of 
miracles.—[ évepyjpuata, a passive noun, which, 
if construed strictly, would denote the things: 
wrought by miraculous power; Hodge trans- 
lates the clause, effects which are miraculous, and: 
here the effect is put for the cause, viz., the- 
ability to work miracles]. The miracles here. 
are of a still different kind from those of healing, . 
such as the expulsion of devils, raising the dead, . 
and, according to Calvin and others, judicial in- 
flictions also, as in Acts v. 5, 9; according to. 
Olshausen, operations as in Mark xvi. 18; Acts. 
xxviii. 5 [the safe handling of serpents and deadly 
things]. Meyer understands it of miraculous. 
effects of all kinds (comp. Acts iv. 80), and not 
simply healings. How a speculative rationalism 
interprets these charisms or gifts, may be seen 
from Dr. Baur’s Paulus, p. 559f, ‘‘ Faith,” he 
explains as a peculiarly strong trust in Provi- 
dence; ‘gifts of healing”? mean no more than the 
ability to pray with peculiar power and earnest- 
ness in behalf of the sick, with more or less as- 
surance of their recovery, if they please God; 


252 





and the “operations of miracles,” are the proofs 
of extraordinary strength of soul and vital 
power in respect to the deeper things of Chris- 
tianity. The relation of these three charisms to 
the Spirit is expressed by three different prepo- 
sitions: διά, through; κατά, according to; ἐν, in. 
The phrase —through the Spirit—then desig- 
nates the Spirit as the power which mediates the 
Divine bestowments,—according to the same 
spirit—as the power which disposes and regu- 
lates them,—in the same spirit—as the power 
in which the charism is founded.—Distinet from 
these three charisms are the two following,—and 
to another prophecy, and to another 
discerning of spirits,—the latter correspond- 
ing with the former. These cannot in any case 
be referred, as by Meyer, to a heroic faith; for 
the prophecy alluded to in Rom. xii. 6, ‘‘ whether 
prophecy, let us prophesy according to the ana- 
logy of faith,” is of a different sort. Prophecy 
here (comp. xi. 3) means the announcement of 
things hidden by means of a Divine revelation or 
inspiration—in other words, the ability obtained 
by the illumination of the Spirit, or through the 
opening of the spiritual vision by Him, to unfold 
the onward progress of the kingdom of God,— 
especially its future developments, or even to 
open up the mysteries of the inner and outer life. 
The inspiration in this case is not a blind rhap- 
sodic excitement, but one united with a clear 
self-consciousness and the free exercise of the 
faculties (comp. xiv. 32 f.); and the discourse is 
carried on in an exalted and earnest, yet per- 
-fectly intelligible strain. By the side of this en- 
lightening (xiv. 24), awakening, invigorating, 
inspiring operation of the Spirit, there stands a 
judicial and critical power, ‘discerning of Spi- 
rits,” i. e., an ability to distinguish true prophecy 
from the false, in the same or in different sub- 
jects,—to discern between the pure inspiration 
of the divine Spirit and the impure excitements 
either of the natural man or of demoniac agen- 
cies—an ability which includes in itself a sus- 
ceptibility for prophecy and an ability to enter 
into prophetic ecstasy. The demand for such 
‘discrimination is indicated in 1 Thess. y. 21; 1 
John iv. 1. ‘[It appears, especially from the 
epistles of the Apostle John that pretenders to 
‘inspiration were numerous in the apostolic age. 
He therefore exhorts his readers, ‘‘to try the 
‘Spirits, whether they be of God; for many false 
prophets are gone out into the world.” It was 
therefore of importance to have a class of men 
with the gift of discernment, who could deter- 
mine whether a man was really inspired, or 
‘spoke only either from the impulse of his own 
mind or from the dictation of some evil Spirit.” 
Hovaz]. Theplural ‘spirits’ is to be referred 
either to different agencies at work in prophecy, 
viz., the divine, the human, the demonic; or to 
the manifold operations of the Spirit and by me- 
tonymy, to those inspired by the Spirit. The 
‘correct interpretation is problematical. The enu- 
meration concludes,—and to another, divers 
kinds of tongues and to another the in- 
terpretation of tongues.—By γένη, kinds, he 
indicates the diversity there was in the tongues— 
a diversity of race, family, speciesand modes. But 
what is meant by the word ‘‘tongues” (γλῶσσαι) 
is much disputed. I. The older exposition pro- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ceeds from the definition language, and appeals 
for support to the promise of Christ, Mark xvi. 17 
‘they shall speak with new tongues” and to the 
miracle of Pentecost recorded in Acts ii. Itun- 
derstands this gift to be an ability to speak in 
various unacquired foreign languages under the 
influence of the Spirit which for the moment dis- 
solved all bounds of language, and transported 
the subjects of it into a state of ecstasy, thereby 
symbolizing the universality of the Gospel. This 
view later commentators have modified ; some ex- 


‘plaining the circumstance to be a speaking or 


worshipping in acquired languages, falsely re- 
garded as a charism (Fritzsche); and others as- 
serting that by the power of the Spirit these 
Christians had been qualified to speak in the 
original language—a language which contained 
the elements or rudiments of the various his- 
torical languages, and was the type of the broad 
general character of Christianity (Bilroth).— 
Others, who reject the older interpretation as 
not well sustained, partly because of the impos- 
sibility of the thing itself, or at least because it 
was wholly uncalled for by the circumstances of 
the Corinthians, and partly because irreconcila- 
ble with the various expressions and statements 
of our paragraph (comp. on chap. xiy.), have 
abandoned the meaning language, on the assump- 
tion either that the phenomenon at Pentecost 
was different in kind from that here spoken of 
[that being evidently a speaking in foreign lan- 
guages, intelligible to the hearers, while this 
needed interpretation], or that the account in 
Acts [being much later than our epistle] was a 
perverted tradition of the original facts. But 
these interpreters themselves start from differ- 
ent significations of the word in question. II. 
Some take it to mean glosses, t. e., highly poetic 
words and forms that are obsolete or provincial, 
[(a sense in which the term is used by the Greek 
grammarians; see Arist. Rhet. iii. 2. 3 14)] 
(Bleek); or, uncommon and striking expres- 
sions, differing from common usage and partly 
taken from foreign languages, employed to assist 
the utterance of the Spirit which was struggling 
for expression under the stress of overflowing 
feelings (Baur) — an interpretation which is 
certainly foreign to the New Testament, and which 


in particular passages is fraught with great dif- 


ficulties. III. Others, hold fast to the other 
fundamental meaning of the term, viz., tongue as 
the organ of speech. In their view the gift im- 
plied the special use of this organ for expression, 
1. either in its cruder form, as the babbling of 
inarticulate tones [where the tongue moved and 
not the lips] (Eichhorn and others); or 2. as an 
ecstatic speaking in low, scarcely audible, inar- 
ticulate words, tones, sounds, whereby the in- 
spired Spirit gave vent to itself (Wieseler)—a 
view which is decisively opposed by chap. xiv. 
18; or 3. as an act of worship by means of 
ecstatic exclamations, and snatches of hymns 
of praise and other outbursts of prayer, where 
the tongue no longer served as an organ of con- 
scious intelligence, but moved independently and 
involuntarily under the impulse of the Spirit (Dr. 
Schultz, de Wette, Meyer and others); or 4 
as an inspired utterance in which the conscious 
intellect was held in abeyance and the spirit of 
the worshipper overpowered and rayished by the 


CHAP. XII. 





might of the Spirit, gushed forth in words and 
sentences involuntarily forced upon him, which 
were unintelligible to those of his hearers who 
were not possessed of the same inspiration. We 
shali revert to this point hereafter, [see chap. 
xiv.]. Since this speaking with tongues was 
unintelligible to the congregation, it was neces- 
sarily supplemented by another gift, viz., <‘the 
interpretation of tongues.” This was the ability 
to translate this unintelligible utterance into a 
language known to all, and so to explain its mean- 
ing—an ability which implied the power of 
bringing the understanding (νοῦς) to bear upon 
the meaning of the things wrought by the Spirit, 
and thus to consciously apprehend them. This 
charism belonged either to the person himself 
who spoke with tongues (comp. xiv. 5, 13), or, 
88 one passage intimates, to a distinct class. 
Having thus enumerated the several gifts, he 
once more refers in ver. 11 to the one original 
principle from which they proceeded, the one- 
ness of which is brought out emphatically in the 
expression ‘‘the one and the same.””—All these 
things works one and the same Spirit.— 
What he asserted of God in ver. 6, he here 
ascribes to the Spirit,—évepyei, he works, so that 
the Spirit here appears as a creative power—as 
the Spirit of God working divinely. As in this 
verb we have the import of the prepositions ‘‘in” 
and ‘‘through” (vv. 9 and 8) again brought 
out, so that of the other preposition ‘‘ according 
to,” ver. 8, is again resumed in the participial 
clause,—distributing, etc.—The Spirit is here 
represented as a voluntary regulating power, in 
terms which show Him to be not a blind energy, 
but a self-conscious, intelligent agent.—As he 
wills—not arbitrarily, but, in perfect consistency 
with classic usage, according to a rational and 
discriminating self-determination which decides 
its action upon the grounds and purposes of a 
divine wisdom and love.—to each one sev- 
erally,—in so far as He imparts to each one 
something special, so that each one has a charism 
of his own by which he is distinguished from 
others with their endowments. This is in ac- 
cordance with that principle of individualization 
which pervades the whole economy of creation. 
The divine idea pours itself forth in a rich va- 
riety of forms which again combine to supple- 
ment each other in the exercise of that same di- 
vine love which ruled in their creation. This is 
what the apostle further sets forth in an in- 
structive analogy, whereby it would seem he 
aimed to counteract alike the disparagement as 
well as the overestimate of particular gifts— 
shall we add also, the misapprehension of the di- 
vine principle therein? At any rate there is no ar- 
gument here against referring the gifts to a variety 
of originating causes or principles (Mosheim). 
Ver. 12, 18. He here proceeds to explain or 
confirm what is stated in ver. 11. The unity of 
the in-working Spirit in the variety of His gifts 
to the Church corresponds to the unity of the 
Church itself in the variety of its members as 
typified in our physical organization.* [This 





{* The proper definition of an organism is, a whole con- 
sisting of parts which exist and work each for all and all for 
each; in other words which are reciprocally related as means 
andend. But sucha constitution can only be effected by 
the creative power of some vital principle working from 
within in accordance with its own specific law or norm. 


— 


thought is again further developed in ver. 14, se 
as to exhibit the organic character of the spi- 
ritual gifts, and their supplementary connection 
with each other. First, the organic unity of the 
church is likened to that of the body, showing 
that the unity is one which does not exclude di- 
versity, and, on the other hand, diversity as not 
conflicting with unity.—For as the body is 
one, and yet.—By reason of the contrast be- 
tween the one and the many the καί should be 
rendered, and yet,—has many members, and 
all members of the body.—The word * body” 
is here repeated by way of emphasis, in order to 
indicate in advance the unity of the members 
amid the plurality, (although) being many— 
πολλὰ 6vta—is to betranslated concessively,— 
are one body.—Short and pregnant is the 
concluding clause,—so also is Christ,—not 
Christ in His distinctive personality, but as in- 
cluding the church in Himself as His living or- 
ganism. As Augustine says, totus Christus caput 
et corpus est. ‘*The whole Christ includes both 
head and body.” ‘What the state is in its own 
sphere as a moral person possessed of corporate 
rights, that the church is in its sphere; and the 
name of its collective personality is Christ.” W. 
F, Besser. ‘In the view of the Apostle, Christ 
is the archetype of a new and glorified humanity 
as it is developed in the church. Hence the de- 
velopment of the Christian Church is nothing less 
than the progressive development of the image 
of Christ.”” Neanprr. (Comp. Eph. i. 23; v. 
30). That here the plurality constitutes a unity 
is exhibited by a reference to the facts by which 
a church-life is constituted. The first and fore- 
most of these is baptism (comp. Eph. iv. 5)— 
a transaction which involves also the dispensa- 
tion of the Spirit. (Comp. John i. 33; iii. 5; 
Tit. ili. 5).—for also.—The καί belongs either 
to the whole clause, or to the words immediately 








‘This it is which assimilates the material of which the or- 
ganism is composed into one substance, preserves its iden- 
tity amid al) changes of form, and its unity through all di- 
versity, and establishes and maintains the reciprocal action 
of the parts combining them in a sympathetic relation, and 
making them tributary both to the well-being of each other 
severally, and of the whole. In this respect an organism is 
essentially differenced from mechanism, which is something 
fashioned and put together by a power operating from 
without. 

Now, since it is of the nature of all life to organize, there 
exists a striking analogy between all true organizations; 
and one serves well to illustrate another. The figure, there- 
fore, which runs throughout this chapter, rests on an es- 
sential analogy. The life of nature as operating in that 
most perféct of organisms, the human form very properly 
typifies the working of the Spirit of life in constituting the 
body of Christ, which is His Church. As might be expected, 
however, the latter organization, in proportion as it is higher, 
is more complex and far richer in its combinations and re- 
sults. It is not for this reason any the less areal body, and 
all that may be asserted of the former holds literally good 
of the latter. The main difference lies in the nature of the 
yital principle which assimilates, shapes, and joins together 
the Church of God The Spirit of life here is a Spirit of 
love, yea, is love itself, and the law which regulates its ope- 
rations is the divine Word. He who lives in the Spirit 
loves ;—The two words are no less identical in their root, 
than are the things which they describe. And love is from 
its very nature organic. It binds persons together in one 
yital communion; and being an intelligent principle, it 
binds them together according to their distinctive qualities 
and gifts for the same holy end. Thus does it constitute the 
body of Christ,—one complex and glorious whole, count- 
lessly diversified in its membership, yet fitly joined together 





and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, accord- 
ing to the effectual working in the measure of every part, 
and growing up into Him in all things which is the Heag 
even Christ], 


254 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





following, g.d., ‘the union is not simply by 
external bonds, but also through the Spirit.’ 
(Meyer).—in one Spirit have we all been 
baptized.—The Spirit is here represented as 
the element into which the baptized have been 
transferred, and in which as the result of their 
baptism they ever after live and move (Acts ii. 
88; xix. 5, 6).—A further consequence of this 
is the formation of one body ;—into one body— 
i. e., ‘so as to become one body;’ or, ‘in order to 
become one body;’ thus stating the object for 
which the Spirit wrought in it. The latter is to 
be preferred as the simpler form.—whether 
Jews or Greeks, bond or free.—Here the 
strongest contrasts of national, religious, and 
social life are specially mentioned as illustrating 
the mighty unific power of the Spirit in abolish- 
ing them:—‘* The higher unity designated is an 
all comprehensive one. It does not destroy the 
distinctions of race and condition, but it assigns 
to them a suitable order, and overcomes them in 
their sharp and selfish antagonisms. Jews and 
Greeks are to remain Jews and Greeks, yet they 
are to subordinate their national peculiarities to 
a higher Christian unity.” NeaAnpgrR.—and we 
all were made to drink one Spirit.—[év 
πνεῦμα ἐποτίσϑημεν, for the construction 
of the acc., with a passive verb, see 781}, 3 545, 
8, or Winer, P. III., 3 82, ὃ; for the omission of 
the εἰς into, see critical notes]. This statement 
is parallel to the former. Accordingly some 
think they discover here a reference to the mys- 
tery of the Holy Supper as associated with bap- 
tism, [and helping to blend believers into one 
body], (comp. x. 4; xi. 2). This reference is to 
be recognized in the reading εἰς ἕν πνεῦμα and ἕν 
πόμα. The objections to this are: 1, the praete- 
rite ἐποτίσϑημεν were made to drink, [which de- 
notes a past event ],—and cannot be regarded as 
the aorist of custom, since it must be taken ana- 
logously with ἐβαπτίσϑημεν, were baptized; (so 
Billroth, Olsh. [Hodge]). 2, the contents of the 
clause itself; since nowhere else do we read of 
the Lord’s Supper, and still less of the drinking 
of the cup, as a means of partaking of one 
Spirit :—But if a union with Christ is effected in 
the Supper, and if the communion of His bodily 
life offered up for us cannot be separated from 
the communion of His divine life, then must 
there be in it also an imparting of the Spirit as 
in baptism; and, moreover, since the Spirit is 
exhibited to us under the figure of a flowing 
stream, e.g., ‘the outpouring of the Spirit,’ 
Acts ii.; ‘the living water which Christ gives,’ 
John vii. 37, ff. (comp. iv. 14) it was natural 
that Paul should select this part of the supper, 
and not the eating of the bread as specially in- 
dicating our participation in the Spirit. If this 
explanation holds, we must then suppose the 
aorist ἐποτίσϑημεν to have been used in conformity 
with the parallel ἐβαπτίσϑημεν, and because he 
was speaking of the participation in the Spirit 
not as a continuous act, but as something which, 
together with baptism, had already served to 
found the collective life of the church. Both are 
completed facts, by means of which the union of 
the church has been constituted in the Spirit. 
And here we may also distinguish between the 
operation of the Spirit laying the foundation of 
the work in baptism, and the intimate appropri- 


ation of the Spirit through the supper (comp, 
Osiander). If we reject the idea of an allusion 
to the supper, then we either lose the parallel- 
ism with the verb ‘‘ were baptized,” or we must 
surrender also the idea of any allusion to the 
rite of baptism even here, and explain it simply 
of the copious effusion of the Spirit.* But, at any 
rate, it is strange that after he had spoken of the 
one Spirit as that on which our being baptized 
into one body is founded he should again so em- 
phatically speak of participating in the same (as 
Meyer: ‘‘ The reception of the one Spirit in bap- 
tism is once more emphatically expressed”). «It 
is clear from this passage that Paul considers the. 
unity of the church not as something formed from 
without, but as fashioned from within.” NEANDER, 
Ver. 14-26. The proposition that the unity of 
organization includes, rather than excludes, a 
plurality of membership, is next carried out in 
relation to the human body, and that too in a 
way to suggest practical instructions in respect 
to the organization of spiritual gifts in the 
church. ‘The first lesson is a dissuasive against 
discontent on account of the smallness of the 
gift, and against a consequent disposition to 
withdraw from the church either in jealousy or 
in self-disparagement, as though persons so 
feebly endowed could do nothing towards inte- 
grating the body. The several members are here 
introduced as holding colloquy to this effect ina 
highly dramatic style. Something like this is to 
be found in the apology of Mrnrntus AGRIPPA; 
Livy, Τ1., ὃ p. 32.—For the body is not one 
member, but many.—[‘‘The word ‘member’ 
means a constituent part, having a function of 
its own. It is not merely a multiplicity of parts 
that is necessary to the body; nor a multiplicity 
of persons that is necessary to the church; but, 
in both gases, what is required is a multiplicity 
of members in the sense just stated. No one of 
these is complete in itself. Each represents 
something that is not so well represented in the 
others. Each has its own function to exercise, 
and work to perform, which could not so well be 
accomplished without it. It is only when the 
hand undertakes to turn the foot out of the body 
that the foot is bound in self-defence, and for the 
good of the whole, to defend itsrights.”” Hodge].— 
If the foot shall say, Because Iam ποῖ 8 
hand,Iam not ofthe body; itis not there- 
fore not of the body. The final clause od 
παρὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ σώματος, 
may be either taken as a question [Alford, 
Hodge]; in which case the double negative 
would be equivalent to a single one, [W1NER 3 





[Ὁ So Hodge, who argues strenuously against supposing 
any allusion in this passagetto either of the sacraments. And 
it must be confessed that the thought of such an allusion 
does not readily occur to the mind of a common reader, 
Scripture abounds in such figures as are here used without 
any possible reference either to the rite of baptism, or, of the 
Lord’s supper (comp., Matth. iii, 2; John i. 33; John vii. 
87). Yet the fact must be noted that the great body of an- 
cient and early modern commentators, 6. g., Luther, Beza, 
Calvin, Henry, Scott, interpret as Kling does, and all later 
ones of Sacramentarian proclivities like Wordsworth. Al- 
ford maintains an allusion to baptism only, in both the ex- 
pressions in accordance with Chrys. Theoph. Bengel, Riick- 
ert, de Wette, Meyer, and others; while Barnes denies this, 
or maintains only the allusion to the supper in the second, 
The case hardly admits of being decided by argument, and 
will contiune to be determined in accordance with the feel. 
ings and original preferences of different individuals. 
Scutevsner’s Lez. IL, p. 671). 


CHAP. XII. 


255 


a Seta cee et ee RSet γον 


59, 8b.], and this would indeed be a more lively 
way of constructing the sentence; but whether 
grammatically allowable is doubtful. Or it may 
be taken as an affirmative clause, in which case, 
then, the οὐκ ἔστεν would form a distinct idea: 
‘it is not on that account not of the body.’ [So 
Stanley, Lachm., Billr., Riick. ].—zapa τοῦτο [in- 
stead of the more common διὰ τοῦτο] on this ac- 
count, or more literally, ‘alongside of this.’ 
[Jeur. Greek Gr., 3 637, III. 8, d.]—If the ear 
shall say because I am not the eye, I am 
not of the body, it is not therefore not of 
the body.—As in comparison with the foot the 
hand is the nobler member, so is the eye in compa- 
rison with the ear. It is the hegemonical (ἡγεμό- 
vikov) or directing part of the body. The hand 
and foot denote the higher and lower gifts of ser- 
vice; the eye and the ear, the intellectual gifts. 
Particular explanations here are in any case 
questionable. [‘*The obvious duty here incul- 
cated is that of contentment. It is just as un- 
reasonable and absurd for the foot to complain 
that it is not the hand, as for one member of the 
church to complain that he is not another; that 
is, for a teacher to complain that he is not an 
apostle; or for a deaconess to complain that she 
is not a presbyter; or for one who had the gift 
of healing to complain that he had not the gift 
of tongues. This, as the Apostle shows, would 
destroy the very idea of the church.” ΗΟΡαΕΊ. 
That this undervaluation of the lesser gifts, and 
this excessive or exclusive estimate of the more 
notable gifts was altogether improper, is next 
shown from the fact that were the latter to exist 
alone, the body of Christ would lack some of its 
most essential functions.—If the whole body 
were an eye, where were the hearing ? 
If the whole were hearing, where were 
the smelling? A gradation is here observed 
from the higher to the lower. In the terms 
‘chearing ” and ‘‘smelling”’ the organs are de- 
signated according to their functions; [or per- 
haps we might better say the functions are 
specified in order to set forth the importance of 
the organ through which they are performed. 
‘The application of this idea to the church is 
plain. It also requires for its existence a diver- 
sity of gifts and offices. If all were apostles, 
where would be the Church ?” or where the dia- 
conate, or where the eldership?] In contrast 
with the condition of things arising from this 
one-sided estimate of particular gifts he next 
exhibits the nature of a true organization as 
ordained by God.—But now,—+. 6., as the case 
actually stands,—God set—évero, not ‘made,’ 
but set, i. ¢., gave them a position, and a desti- 
nation in accordance with it. The divine pur- 
pose here presents a silent contrast to the proud 
and selfish views and wishes of men as being 
one of perfect love and wisdom.—the members 
each one of them,—the latter expression is 
added in order to cut off all thought of exception 
in any particular.—in the body, as it hath 
pleased him.—T[i. ¢., it is not man’s fancy that 
here rules, but the will of Him whose wisdom 
and right are unquestionable. In rebelling there- 
fore against our place and appointment we are 
virtually rebelling against the Creator and right- 
ΤᾺ] Disposer of all things].—And if they were 








The exclusive maintenance of one organ virtu- 
ally destroys the whole organism; [and this na- 
turally reacts to the prejudice of the organ itself: 
for where is the use or even the dignity of the 
organ without the body to which it is attached 2] 
—But now are they indeed many mem- 
bers, but one body.—This is the character of 
all proper organization—plurality in unity.— 
He next in ver. 21 rebukes the pride of the more 
highly gifted, and refutes their vain conceit of 
the dispensableness of the lesser gifts to them.—- 
and the eye cannot.—ovw δύναται, not 
‘‘may not,” but absolutely cannot, because the 
hand is really indispensable to the eye,—say 
to the hand, I have no need of thee: nor 
again the head to the feet, I have no 
need of you.—[He here exhibits “the mutual 
dependence of the members of the Church. The 
most gifted are-as much dependent on those less 
favored as the latter are on the former. Pride, 
therefore, is as much out of place in the Church 
as discontent.” Hoper]. In contrast with the 
negative he next sets forth the positive side of 
the fact.—Nay, much more, those members 
of the body, which seem to be weaker, 
are necessary :—The adverbial phrase ‘‘much 
more’’ does not belong to the adjective “ neces- 
sary,” g.d., ‘much more necessary,’ as this 
would involve an unsuitable thought; but to the 
whole clause, and carries the logical sense of far 
rather. The specific class of members here al- 
luded to it is neither possible nor necessary to 
decide upon. [‘' They are best left undefined, 
as the Apostle kas left them.” Srantny]. He 
certainly cannot mean the eye or the head, be- 
cause of what is said in ver. 21; neither could 
he intend to term the hands and the feet as 
seemingly weaker than the eye or the head. 
Other suppositions, such as that the brain and 
vitals were here alluded to [Hodge], are wholly 
uncertain ; [at least, they are not naturally sug- 
gested]. To translate ἀσϑενέστερα by smaller, is 
unwarrantable. [Alford understands by the 
phrase in question, ‘‘those members which in 
each man’s case appear to be the inheritors of 
disease, or to have incurred weakness. By this 
very fact their necessity to Him is brought out 
much more than that of the others.’’ But what- 
ever may have been the specific thing had in 
view by the Apestle, the lesson is plain. The 
very weakliest in the Church—whether it be in 
body, mind, or estate—have their use, and are 
not to be despised or overlooked. The sick, if 
they cannot work. can pray. The poor are need- 
ful to the eliciting of charity. And the children, 
however helpless, cannot be spared from the fold, 
for they are the hope of the future].—and 
those members which we think to be 
more dishonorable.—It would be natural here 
to think of the arms, feet, and ears which peo- 
ple are wont to adorn with all kinds of orna- 
ments. [But is there not an emphasis laid on 
the expression ‘we think,’ and a force in the 
term ἀτιμότερα, which point to other parts of the 
body which sin only has associated with a sense 
of shame, and which we are therefore more care- 
ful to honor by concealment ?]—on them we 
bestow the more abundant honor,—~. e., 
by means of clothing or adornment. [‘‘It is 


all one member, where were the body ?— | observed by Raphelius that τιμὴν περιτιϑέναι 


250 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





signifies in general to give honor; but in this 
passage by a metonymy, to cover over with a gar- 
ment that which, if seen, would have a disagree- 
able and unseemly appearance, and this is a 
kind of honor put upon them’’]. The word 
περιτιϑέναι often denotes dress (Matt. xxvii. 28; 
Gen. xxvii. 16 ff. [‘‘by which passage τίμην may 
possibly have been suggested since it is here used 
by the LXX. for a covering of eyes.” Sran- 
LEY]).—and our uncomely parts have 
more abundant comeliness.—What are here 
meant cannot be doubted. [If the second expla- 
nation given above be the true one, we have here 
simply an expansion of the statement just pre- 
ceding]. Our uncomely parts receive a more 
decorous regard than the other members, inas- 
much as they are more carefully clothed as a 
matter of propriety. With all this he gives us 
to understand that the lesser gifts in the Church 
are not to be lightly esteemed and neglected; 
but should be treated with the greater consider- 
ation and care, because they are indispensable 
to the whole body, and the honor of the Church 
depends no less on the proper care of these than 
does the honor of the body upon the adorning 
of the less honorable, or the veiling of the un- 
comely members. [‘‘It is an instinct of grace 
to honor most those members of the Church who 
least attract admiration.” Hopar]. By way of 
completeness he adds,—For our comely parts 
have no need:—i. ¢., to have such care be- 
stowed on them. [They are in fact in a measure 
neglected. The face goes uncovered, the hands 
and often the feet are left bare, because their 
exposure involves no disgrace].—But God 
hath tempered the body together,—There 
are two constructions here: 1. That of Lach- 
mann and Meyer, who take this clause as directly 
antithetic to what precedes, and put only acomma 
after ἔχει. In this case ἡμῶν would be de- 
pendent on οὗ χρείαν ἔχει, and stand in 
contrast with ὁ ϑέος, so as to read: ‘our 
uncomely parts have no need of us; but God 
hath,’ etc. Such a construction, however, would 
not conform to the analogy of τὰ ἀσχήμονα 
ἡμῶν [and it is rejected by Alford, Stanley, and 
Wordsworth.] Or 2., which is preferable, a 
period may be put after ἐχ ει, and the clause may 
be regarded as a more comprehensive statement 
of the relation of the members to each other in 
their higher destination and composition, in 
contrast with the view previously taken of them 
separately, and presenting the whole from a 
teleological stand-point. ᾿Αλλὰ, but, would 
then have a strongly adversative meaning.—[In 
his reference to the work of ““ God”’ he takes us 
back to the original creation of man, and points 
to the primitive constitution of things]. Συνε- 
κέρασεν indicates such a mutual adjustment 
of the parts in the body as shall counterbalance 
differences, so that one part shall qualify another. 
So κεράννυμι is used to denote a tempering of 
parts by mixture; then, a pleasant harmonizing 
of contrasts bringing out from them an agree- 
able manifoldness and interchange, (compare 
Passow I. 2, p. 1707).—By way of more exact 
definition he adds,—having given more 
abundant honor to that which lacked.— 
i. e., by making the uncomely parts essential to 
the well-being of the rest, and by diffusing a 


common life to all the members, so as to bring 
them into close sympathy one with another, and 
awaken in each an interest for all according to 
their several characters and conditions.—The 
object of this is next stated.—in order that 
there may be no schism in the body ;— 
zt. e., through the neglect of the inferior mem- 
bers on the part of the superior ones; or by the 
separation of the subordinate ones from the 
ruling members, because of their not receiving 
that, consideration and care which is due to them 
as members of one body. There is an allusion 
here to the schisms in the Corinthian Church, 
whose influence was felt also in the matter of 
the gifts in so far as they served to undermine 
or weaken the common fellowship.—but that 
the members should care one for another. 
—The use of the plural μεριμνῶσιν after a 
neut. plural nominative, is owing to the fact of 
his having personified the members.—TZhe same, 
τὸ αὐτό, 2. 6., in a harmony that is opposed to 
all schism by virtue of which each member has 
the same interest in charge, viz., the well being 
of allthe rest. This thought is expressed still 
further by setting forth the mutual participation 
of all in the good or bad condition of the others 
severally, (comp. Rom. xii. 15).—And whether 
one member suffer, all the members suf- 
fer with it;—The verbs here fall away from 
their dependence on iva, so as to indicate that 
the divine purpose before spoken of has already 
been realized. The conjunction ‘‘and” joins 
this lightiy and yet closely to the final clauses, 
and to the main verb preceding, as a consequence 
resulting of itself, or establishing the truth of 
the case. The sympathy here spoken of implies 
not merely a common sense of the injury inflicted 
upon any one, but also an active effort to abate 
the pain and remove the cause. In this way the 
care, which one should take for the other, is pro- 
perly carried out.—or one member be 
honored, all the members rejoice with 
it.—The honor here may be that which is con- 
ferred by apparel and ornament, and the like, 
as well as by the recognition of the beauty, 
strength, or utility thus obtained, on the part of 
the others (Meyer).—The ‘rejoicing’ is that 
satisfaction and sense of common well-being 
which arises by virtue of the organic connection 
between the members. But from this it does not 
follow that δοξάζεσϑαι is—=bene et feliciter haberi, — 
‘to be in prosperity and happiness” [CaLvin]. 
Rather we might here suppose him to mean that 
fine development which ensues as the result of 
human care and divine providence (Osiander). 
On the whole, however, we had better abide by 
the common interpretation which well suits the 
personification employed, and the mare so, be- 
cause he is just passing over to the practical 
application. The Romish expositors with great 
impropriety deduce from the expression ‘rejoice 
with’ the doctrine of an overflow of merit from 
the saints upon the rest of the Church.—It is 
obvious from what has been said that Paul here 
meant to mortify the pride of the Corinthians 
who boasted of their more noted gifts, and did 
not take to heart the welfare or the suffering of 
the Church and its members. 

Vers. 27, 28. He goes on to apply what has 
been said concerning the human body to his 


CHAP. XII. 





readers as a church of Chrisi, composed of indi- 
vidual members.—Now ye are the body of 
Christ—céua χριστοῦ, not a body of 
Christ, as though the churches were severally 
regarded as distinct bodies of Christ; rather 
each church is taken to represent the body of 
Christ, 7. e., the whole of Christendom. Analo- 
gous to νάος ϑεοῦ, iii. 6 [see WinER, ἢ XIX., 2 ὁ.1. 
The figure of the church as Christ’s body fre- 
quently occurs, Eph. i. 23; ii. 16; iv. 4, 12, 16; 
y. 23, 80; comp. Col. i. 18, 24; ii. 19; iii. 15. 
Of this body Christ is the ruling and quickening 
Head.—and members in particular.—This 
he adds to distinguish the individuals from the 
whole church collectively; since they, in their 
several capacities only, could be regarded as 
members. The expression ἐκ μέρους may be 
rendered either individually in particular, as else- 
where κατὰ μέρος and ἐπὶ μέρους ; or, a8 a More 
exact qualification, proportionately, according to 
the share which each one has in the body of 
Christ, according to his place and function in the 
collective organism (Meyer and Osiander). The 
former rendering is obviously the more correct. 
To explain this clause of local churches as parts 
of the whole church, or of those more spiritually 
endowed, as if they exclusively were members of 
the church, is altogether untenable. This gene- 
ral application is now unfolded in detail. Pass- 
ing from the simple division expressed by 
od¢ μὲν toa statement of orders in their seve- 
ral gradations; hence no οὖς dé follows (as in 
Eph. iv. 11)—And some God set in the 
church—. ¢., the church asa whole, because of 
the mention of Apostles who were preéminent 
over the whole body.—first apostles—being 
possessed of the fulness of all-gifts. These oc- 
cupy the highest rank (comp. oni. 1). They in- 
clude not merely the original twelve, but Paul 
also, who, in consequence of the direct calling of 
Christ, occupied the same position towards the 
churches converted from heathenism, which the 
others did towards the churches converted from 
the Jews. But whether Barnabas and the like 
are to be included also, is less certain. [These 
have no successors, not even in the bishops, who 
are supposed to be their spiritual lineage. 
‘«‘They were the immediate messengers of 
Christ, rendered infallibleas teachers and rulers 
by the gift of plenary inspiration.” Hover]. 
Next follow those who are limited to particular 
gifts, and are only indirectly called—secondly 
prophets, thirdly teachers.—These are dis- 
tinguished just as the gift of inspired utterance 
through a direct revelation (comp. on ver. 9) af- 
fording deeper glances into the spirit world, is 
distinguished from the acquired ability for 
calmly unfolding Christian truth and furthering 
its comprehension. While, as a general rule, the 
prophets (as well as the evangelists, Eph. iv. 11) 
occupy amore extended sphere of labor, standing 
in this respect more nearly to the Apostles 
(comp. Acts xv. 32), the teachers usually dis- 
charged their functions in particular churches 
(Eph. iv. 11). We find the two classes also as- 
sociated in Acts xiii. 1; but here those are in- 
cluded under the term teachers, who were called 
to a more comprehensive range of duty. Out of 
the above mentioned gifts the teacher possessed 
preéminently ‘‘the word of knowledge.” —From 
Ξ 17 


257 


—_—. 


the concrete he next passes over into the ab- 
stract, designating not persons, but offices (re- 
versing Rom. xii. 6 ff.); not because there was ἃ 
lack of concrete terms, but for the sake of 
change. NEANDER says, however: ‘because 
the gifts he proceeds to enumerate were not so 
definitely and continuously connected with cer- 
tain persons,” [‘‘but were granted promiscuously 
to all orders in the church.” ALrorp].—after 
that miracles,—sc. ἔϑετο in the sense of ἔδωκεν, 
gave.—after that gifts of healings,—See on 
ver. 9.—helps, governments,—The mention 
of these supplements and fills out the catalogue of 
ver. 8ff. The things themselves belong to the 
more practical departments of church life. The 
former (comp. 2 Mace. viii. 19; Sir. xi. 12, and 
the verb Luke i. 54; Acts xx. 35) denotes such 
assistance as is rendered by the diaconate for 
the relief of the poor and sick, e/c.; and the se- 
cond, the functions of church administration and 
polity as discharged by elders, bishops, pastors, 
rulers, presidents, or moderators. To refer the 
former to the higher department of government, 
because it stands first [as Stanley does, who 
says: ““ἀντιλήψις, as used in the LXX., is not 
(like dcaxovia) help ministered by an inferior to 
a superior, but by a superior to an inferior (see 
Ps. lxxxix. 18; Eccles. xi. 12; li. 7)”], com- 
ports neither with the meaning of the word, nor 
with the circumstances of the primitive church ; 
besides, the order of rank was given up, when 
the employment of abstract terms began.—lastly 
divers kinds of tongues.—This is mentioned 
last, not for the purpose of assigning the over- 
estimated gift to the lowest place; for, as just 
said, the order of rank is not strictly followed in 
the enumeration; but rather because of its sin- 
gularity (Meyer), or because he has to deal with 
this especially in his subsequent exposition (Osi- 
ander).—He passes over the gifts of ‘ interpreta- 
tion of tongues’ and ‘discernment of spirits,’ 
but mentions them again in ver. 30, where, how- 
ever, ‘helps and governments’ are omitted. 
Were it desirable now to classify the gifts and 
offices specified in this chapter, we might ar- 
range them thus: 1. The gifts of knowledge, of 
word and of doctrine, viz., ‘‘the word of wis- 
dom,” ‘‘the word of knowledge,” ‘‘ teachers,” 
‘prophets,’ and ‘the discerning of spirits;’ 
2. Gifts of power and deed, viz., ““ miracles” and 
‘‘healings,” with their root, ‘‘faith;” 8. Gifts 
of practical life, viz., ‘‘helps” and ‘ govern- 
ments ;” 4. Gifts of ecstatic inspiration and ut- 
terance, viz,, ““ divers kinds of tongues” supple- 
mented by ‘‘ the interpretation of tongues.” We 
might perhaps put under the same head ‘pro- 
phecy ” and ‘speaking with tongues,”’ together 
with the gifts belonging to these, viz., gifts of di- 
rect inspiration manifesting itself, partly with a 
clear gelf-consciousness, as in prophecy, supple- 
mented with the power of discernment for its 
eclaircissement and the maintenance of its purity; 
and partly, in ecstasy with unintelligible utter- 
ance, 7. e., speaking with tongues, supplemented 
with interpretation for the purpose of church 
edification, and so for the attainment of the 
great end for which all gifts were given—the ge- 
neral profit. To reckon the Apostles among the 
first class (Meyer), is hardly fit, since, in accord- 
ance with their high comprehensive position in: 


258 





the church, they embraced all the gifts in their 
possession. It must be affirmed, however, that 
more or less uncertainty must always attend 
this matter of classification, since there must 
have been acombination of different gifts often- 
times in the same person, 6. g., the word of wis- 
dom and prophecy.* 

Vers. 29-31. He continues his application, 
pronouncing still further against all exclu- 
sive regard for particular gifts; since it was 
impossible for all to have one alone, but diversity 
or distribution were necessary.—Are all apos- 
tles? are all prophets ? are all teachers? 
are all miracles ?—It is debated whether the 
last (δυνάμεις) is in the nominative or objective 
governed by have (ἔχουσιν) in the next clause, 
which, were this so, would occupy a remark- 
able place in the series of questions. If, how- 
ever, it be nominative, it is the abstract term 
for the concrete—‘ workers of miracles’ (¢omp. 
Acts viii. 10; Col. i. 16; Rom. viii. 38), just as 
we call men of great power, powers.—do all 
speak with tongues? do all prophesy ? 
[‘* As in the body all is not eye, or all ear, so 
in the church all have not the same gifts and offi- 
ces. These God distributes as He pleases; all 
are necessary and the recipients of them are 
mutually dependent. None must be discontented, 
none must boast.” Hope]. Next follows an ex- 
hortation.—But—~. 6., though all gifts have their 
value and are conferred by God, yet some are 
more valuable than others,—be zealous for— 
such can only be the meaning of the verb ¢ 7- 
λοῦτε, as in xiv. 1, 39.—the better gifts,— 
or according to another reading (see critical 
notes)—the greater gifts.—By these he means 
those best suited to the attainment of the object 
of all gifts (ver. 7). This is a remarkable in- 
junction when viewed in the light of ver. 11, 
where the Spirit is said to ‘‘ distribute unto each 
man severally as He will.”” To reconcile the 
seeming inconsistency some interpret the ‘gifts’ 
here to mean moral Christian virtues, such as 
faith and love, which ought to be sought by all ; 
but this is contrary to the use of the word in this 
epistle, and also to the context and the exposition 
which follows. Others interpret ζηλοῦτε as 
denoting zeal in improvement of the gifts be- 
stowed, contrary to xiv. 1, 39 (Joel ii. 18; Zach. 
1, 14; viii. 2; 2 Sam. xxi. 2, do not belong here). 
Others, again, translate this verb as in the indi- 
cative, g.d., ‘ye in your opinion are seeking ;’ 
others, as a question continuous of that in ver. 


[* ScHarr proposes “a psychological classification, on the 
basis of the three primary faculties of the soul—they all be- 
ing capable and in need of sanctification, and the Holy 
Ghost in fact leaving none of them untouched, but turning 
them all to the edification of the church. With this corre- 
sponds also the classification according to the different 
branches of the church life, in which the activity of one or 
the other of thesy faculties thus supernaturally elevated 
predominated. This would give us three classes of charisms : 
(1) those which relate especially to feeling and worship ; (2) 
these which relate to knowledge and theology; (8) those 
which relate to will and church government. To the gifts of 
feeling belong speaking with tongues, interpretation of 
tongues, and inspired prophetic discourse; to the theoreti- 
cal class, or gifts of intellect, belong the charisms of wisdom 
and of knowledge, of teaching and of discerning spirits; to 
the practical class, or gifts of will, the charisms of ministra- 
tion, of government and of miracles. Fuith lies back of all, 
as the motive power, taking up the whole man and bringing 
all his faculties into contact with the Divine Spirit, and un- 
der His influence and control”). 


i 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— 


29, andregarding both as implying rebuke. But 
this does not suit; since in what follows nothing 
is set over against the thing rebuked; for the 
conjunction which follows is καὶ μού δέ, Nor yet 
is thereany need of sucha construction. Neither 
can we construe the verb as implying merely a 
wish, desire or prayer; for this is contrary to 
the meaning of the word.—Paul is here speak- 
ing of the duty of cultivating in ourselves those 
powers and qualities which may be sanctified 
and exalted into charisms by the power of the 
Spirit, [‘‘and we may notice that the greater 
gifts, those of prophecy and teaching, consisted 
in the inspired exercise of conscious faculties, in 
which culture and diligence would be useful ac- 
cessories.” AtrorpD]. ‘This of course is far dif- 
ferent from the effort which the Pantheists make to 
turn the exercises of their own spirits into a sort 
of divine revelation. What is inculcated is 
simply the preparation of the mind which fits it 
for the divine blessing, just as tillage prepares 
the soil for the genial influences of the sky. 
“Paul everywhere presupposes that the divine 
operation can never take place in man without 
a codperating receptivity on his part.” NeEan- 
DER. That this endeavor should not be directed 
out of vanity to gifts less valuable because less 
subservient to the one great end of edification, 
but rather to those which are preéminent in this 
respect, does not conflict with that unenvying con- 
tentment which he had inculcated above; and it 
is in any case more in conformity with the mean- 
ing of the word ζηλοῦτε than if we said with 
Osiander, that it referred more to the exercise 
of the gifts already had, than to the seeking for 
them, whether we regard the exhortation as di- 
rected to the church asa whole which regulated 
the employment of the gifts, or to the individuals, 
endowed with them.—In this endeavor for the 
best gifts a vigorous spiritual life and a pious 
zeal for furthering the common welfare are apt 
to show themselves. This is indicated in what 
follows, when we are told that this zeal is dis- 
played in the way of love which is the true guide 
of all these endeavors. As NEANDER says: ‘ Paul 
shows us that the best way for discovering the 
better gifts is through love. In his estimation 
love is the standard by which the worth of the 
gifts is to be determined.”—And yet—besides 
exhorting you to be thus zealous—I show unto 
you a very excellent way.—«xavl’ ὑπερ- 
βολὴν belongs to ὁ δὸν, way, in the sense of 
ὑπερέχουσαν, superior, very excellent, as explained 
by Chrys. and Theoph., entirely in accordance 
with Greek usage. Bengel says: viam maxime 
vialem. If we connect it with the verb as in 
some versions, it yields no fitting sense, whether 
we translate it ‘abundantly,’ or ‘in a remark- 
able manner;’ it would be a rare compliment. to 
his own mode of instruction;—nor yet can we 
take the phrase comparatively ‘more excellent,’ 
as exalting love above the charisms (Riickert 
[and the E. V.]), or as implying something eu- 
perior to being zealous for the best gifts. For 
this the context affords no warrant. [‘*The idea 
is not that he intends to show them a way that 
is better than seeking gifts, but a way par ez- 
cellence to obtain those gifts.” Hopa@x. So also 
Alford. ] ’ 


CHAP. XII. 





DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Christianity superior to heathenism in the matter 
of truth and its tests. In heathenism there rules 
a dark and soul-darkening power by which its de- 
votees are blindly impelled. There they have no 
revelation—no Spirit diffusing life and light, but 
only beguiling error and the treachery of priest- 
craft and soothsaying, of oracles and magic. 
There everything tends to keep down the people 
in a state of childish ignorance and benighted 
dependence. Precisely the opposite of this is 
seen in Christianity—the truth and radiance, 
the light and life of the Divine Spirit; hence 
also an elevation to maturity and independence ; 
hence the free offer of tokens by which to test 
the truth. Fora Christian is one who is said to 
know why and in whom he believes; who does 
not suffer himself to accept the fair show of higher 
powers without ascertaining the real character of 
what thus challenges his confidence and seeks to 
influence him—what it aims at, and whence and 
with what authority it comes. He is one fur- 
nished with a sure token of truth in the relation 
which anything sustains to Christ—that Being 
from whom all spiritual light and life descend. 
Whatever tends to disparage Christ, or His 
words, or His merits, or His exclusive availability 
for our religious well being—whatever tends to 
set aside His person as He was originally exhib- 
ited to us, and as He insists on being regarded 
both by His own declaration and that of His ac- 
credited heralds—whatever tends to the denial 
of His absolute worth for us, and of His un- 
rivalled dignity in Himself, can never proceed 
from the Spirit of God. On the contrary, what- 
ever tends directly to glorify Christ and to con- 
firm His truth, and to maintain His saying 
power—whatever exalts Him as the all-suffi- 
cient Savior and the absolute trust-worthy Lord 
—whatever conducts to Him and ascribes to Him 
the honor in all things—this is of the Spirit. 
By such tokens are the operations of the Spirit 
of God ascertained; to these can we confidently 
hold fast and thus be furthered in knowledge and 
in all true piety. 

{Herein we see the perfect concurrence be- 
tween Christ and the Holy Ghost, and how they 
bezr witness to each other. The Holy Ghost 
testifies of Christ, and the genuineness of His 
testimony is ascertained by its relation to what 
we already know of Christ in His Word]. 

2. Nature and grace essentially harmonious and 
analogous. If by nature we understand human 
life as withdrawn from the controlling power of 
the Divine Spirit, and hence as godless and sin- 
ful (as the word is sometimes used), then is there 
between this and grace the strongest antagonism. 
But they stand together in most perfect corres- 
pondence when we consider nature as creaturely 
life, disposed and ordered by the Creator’s will. 
This, so far as it is organized and develops itself 
in the power of that will, furnishes a fit substra- 
tum for all renewing and sanctifying influences 
that are to fashion it in harmony with the Divine 
idea. Of these influences the chief is that which 
we denominate grace, 1. e., Divine love in its re- 
deeming and healing power; and this in its rela- 
tion to nature is a salutary and not a destructive 








259 





; or disturbing force. This truth is clearly mani- 
fested in the gifts of the Holy Ghost. In these 
we discover a spiritual organization which has 
its proper analogon in our physical organization. 
Here there is one whole—a totality consisting of 
various parts, mutually supplementing and 
serving each other, all harmoniously articulated 
by one common principle, and working for one 
and the same end—the preseryation of our natural 
life. And so, too, is that spiritual organization 
one perfect whole, consisting of manifold powers 
which, with their functions and operations, have 
all the same vital principle, viz., the one Spirit, 
the one Lord, the one God; and they operate for 
the same end, viz., the increase of the body of 
Christ. For this reason they are joined together 
in mutual supplementation and subserviency, as 
are likewise those who exercise them—persons 
endowed with manifold capacities of soul and 
body. These, by virtue of that one Spirit actu- 
ating them from within, are all members of the 
church,—each one indeed constituting with his 
own specialty one self-included whole; yet by 
the energy of the Divine love, which is shed 
abroad through them all, each is united with the 
rest, so that each specialty with its own peculiar 
qualities quickened by the Spirit, serves and 
helps the others, forming together with them one 
higher complex life. This specialty consists in 
the peculiar activity or spontaneous movement 
of one particular kind of natural talents, while 
the rest remain in a passive or recipient state; 
so that in respect to the former there is a direct 
proffer of good, a furnishing of aid, while in re- 
spect to the latter there is a need of help, and a 
condition to partake of the good which the others 
have to bestow through their particular advan- 
tages. In this way a rich manifold spiritual life 
is produced. The advantage which each one 
possesses belongs in like manner to all the 
rest. 

In this communion the apparently insignificant 
member is raised by a fellowship with the higher, 
since it partakes of the gifts which the higher 
enjoys, according to its own capacity; and it in 
turn comes to their aid, and is by them acknow- 
ledged and esteemed as indispensable. Thus a 
beautiful temperamentum—a balancing of parts— 
ensues which gives to the whole a harmonious 
character. The high looks not down scornfully 
upon the low; nor does the low look up enviously 
at the high, or fling itself away in self-contempt. 
But each rejoices in the society of members 
whom it can in some way assist with its own 

ift. 

᾿ In this spiritual organization, however, that 
mutual concurrence which in the natural body 
goes on instinctively and unconsciously, is main- 
tained with a clear, intelligent self-determina- 
tion, and in the exercise of a conscious love, and 
through a sense of church union, that goes on 
unfolding itself in wishes and efforts for the 
common good, all having their common principle 
in that faith which recognizes and honors God’s 
gifts wherever seen, and seeks to improve them 
according to the Divine intent. , 

8. Spiritual gifts—their distinctive character. In 
these gifts our natural dispositions and talents 
are so possessed by the Spirit as to recover their 
original condition and use, as formed in accord. 


260 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ance with the Divine image. This possession by 
the Spirit results, partly, in giving to any talent 
already cultivated only a new direction towards 


the highest end, viz., the kingdom of God, so- 


that its capacities are exercised within this 
sphere; thus the matter on which it acts is 
changed, and its form also somewhat modified; 
and, partly, in arousing a slumbering talent to 
action, so that it appears as something new 
which the Spirit of Christ has for the first time 
summoned forth. In thus awakening and sanc- 
tifying our natural talents, the Spirit acts as a 
voluntary agent, according to His own free will, 
directed with reference to the necessities of the 
church or of the individual, so that no one 
deemed worthy of so gracious a gift, can pride 
himself by reason of it, and no one on whom a 
lesser gift has been bestowed, has occasion to 
complain of himself. 

The various endowments, however, stand re- 
lated to the manifold forms and powers of our 
natural life. In one person an intuitive know- 
ledge is awakened and fashioned into an ability 
to apprehend profoundly and comprehensively 
the plans and purposes of God’s providence. In 
another, a capacity for investigation and scien- 
tific statement is awakened and directed towards 
the highest problems of human thought. In 
another, the shaping power of imagination—an 
ability to speak in a vivid and glowing style, is 
employed and sanctified to set forth the myste- 
ries of the kingdom of God and its future deve- 
lopments, or the hidden experiences of the in- 
ward life. In another, the critical, analytic 
power is so enlightened that it is enabled to se- 
parate between the true and the false in religious 
things, discerning between genuine spiritual in- 
fluences, and spurious excitements. In another, 
the energies of the will are roused, so that by 
taking hold believingly on the Divine omnipo- 
tence as proffered in the promises, it can, through 
prayers and strong consolations, work out su- 
perhuman results, heal diseases, relieve infirmi- 
ties, and create or remove whatever needs to be 
established or put away for the glory of God and 
the interests of His kingdom. ‘To these we may 
add a talent for all sorts of charitable service in 
rendering timely and suitable aid to the poor, 
the sick, and the distressed. And finally, a talent 
for governing within a greater or lesser sphere 
with all circumspection, and power, and energy, 
and patience, according to the requirements of 
times and persons. In all this there exists a 
wealth of spiritual operations and a copiousness 
of moral tasks, through the performance of which 
the highest ethical work of art is brought to its 
completion. There is here a Divine operation 
runking through every thing and determining 
our natural life in its manifold capacities, which, 
however, as the operation of a personal God in 
beings destined to a personal life, is one which 
develops a free individual action, and is glorified 
by-it. 

[4. One peculiarity of the Gospel, as contrasted 
with the law, is, that church offices presuppose spi- 
ritual endowments; the office falling not, as of 
old, to the next casual successor, but to those 
qualified for it; and the qualifications springing 
directly from Christ, present by His Spirit in 
the midst of His people. The warrant for exer- 
cising the office is, in the first instance, and be- 


fore it is any thing else, the possession of the 
gifts of the Spirit, who, in this matter, refuses to 
be tied to any external prescription, and divideth 
to every man severally as He will. See Lirron, 
Church of Christ, p. 372 ff.]. 

[5. Gifts and offices not commensurate either in 
number or kind. The gifts were numerous, be- 
stowed in accordance with the necessities of 
particular times and circumstances. Some were 
transient and some permanent, but the offices, 
with the exception of that of the Apostles, are 
permanent; and what they are is to be ascer- 
tained from other portions of Scripture. Hence 
it must be supposed that several gifts were con- 
ferred upon the same individual, and that they 
were exercised often by private persons, without 
any official authority, but under the simple war- 
rant of possessing the gift]. 

[6. The gifts with which the early believers were 
endowed were all earnests of the promised Redemp- 
tion,—pledges presented to the church at its 
very start, of the final victory which it will 
achieve over the whole realm of nature, when its 
true idea as the kingdom of God shall be fully 
realized, and all things shall be made subject to 
it inChrist. They were at the same time designed 
to be signs unto the world of the presence of a 
Divine power in the church, demanding of it faith 
and homage; and must ever be had in the 
church according to the exigencies of her posi- 
tion—some permanent, some transients See Ep- 
wARD Irvina’s Discourse on Zhe Church with 
its endowment of Holiness and Power. Collected 
writings, Vol. V. p. 450ff.]. 

[7. The doctrine of the Trinity. In this chapter, 
especially in vv. 8, 4, 6, 12, 18, 27, 28, we have 
the three factors of the Christian Godhead plainly 
brought to view: I. in their diversity, under sep~ 
‘arate names and functions; 11. in their perso- 
nality as acting with conscious intelligence; III. 
in their unity, as testifying of each other, per- 
forming parts of the same great work, and all 
carrying the attributes of divinity, yet in such a 
way that there are not three Gods, but one God. 
Thus we have God the Father, the first Source 
and Operator of all spiritual influences, and in 
relation to Him these influences are called ‘ op- 
erations ;” God the Son, the Lord of the Church, 
and the Ordainer of all the ministries therein by 
which these influences are brought into exer-. 
cise; and in relation to Him they are termed 
‘“‘ministrations ;” God the Holy Ghost, proceed- 
ing from the Father through the Son, dwelling 
in and animating and sanctifying and binding to- 
gether the whole church into one body—one living 
organism, and imparting to each member such 
measure of power and grace as pleases Him; 
and so in relation to Him these influences are 
termed ‘ gifts.” Thus we have the Trinity in 
unity shown to underlie the whole work of Re- 
demption in its original plan and continued exe- 
cution }. 

Oxss.:—The subject of speaking with tongues 
is reserved for further inquiry, and has not 
therefore been taken under consideration in 
these comments. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke:—Ve_nr. 1. Gifts of miracles, and gifts 
for sanctification are to be distinguished; with 


CHAP. XII. 


— ,---.-..-ὕὕὕὕὕὕὕἥ-----.--θ--. 


the former not only apostles, but also many be- 
lievers have been endowed for the sake of win- 
ning unbelievers; but the latter are necessary 
for all, in order to faith, love, and the worthy 
exercise of all Christian virtues.—Ver. 2. Well 
is it for him who knows what he has been, what 
he is, and what he shall be.—To think of our 
origin, and our former state, incites to humility, 
and keeps us from becoming elated with the gifts 
we have received (Chap. iv. 7; Gen. xxxii. 10). 

Herp :—Ver. 3. He who honors and confesses 
Christ, and shuns no danger for His sake, gives 
strong evidence of his sincerity. Nevertheless 
we must distinguish between saying and doing, 
boasting and performing. Many have only the 
show and speech of Christians; it is all nothing, 
their aim and action betray them. Rub the 
coin, and you will see the copper.—Ver. 4. If 
there is one Spirit, why enviest thou? Itisa 
shame for those who work on the same building 
to take it ill, because one builds above and an- 
other below. Let each one pass for what he is 
worth. Be thou nothing in thine own eyes, but 
faithful in thy work, according to the extent of 
thine ability. O, that the members might once 
agree! What an amount of good would then 
ensue! But no, the devil sunders all through 
envy, and avarice, and ambition.—Ver. 5. Divine 
grace is the true cornucopia out of which we can 


obtain all blessings, yea, a superabundance of 


gifts, and powers, and goods.—Ver. 7. All gifts 
and aptitudes are conferred for the benefit of the 
church. He who perverts them to his own ho- 
nor and use, perpetrates a sort of church-rob- 
bery, and is deserving of punishment (Eph. iv. 
15).—Ver. 8. The glory of the Lord shines forth 
out of the gifts wherewith He has endowed one 
in preference to another. Hast thou great gifts, 
boast not; through small gifts God can accom- 
plish great things. Hast thou small gifts, be 
not impatient and envious; God knows how 
much oil suits thy little cruse. The faith of mi- 
racles helps nothing towards salvation. Art 
thou blest with a sanctifying faith, thank God 
for this glorious gift (2 Thess. i. 3).—Ver. 10. 
Watchful men, who have understanding to prove 
all things, are to be highly regarded as a gift of 
God; and they must withstand the introduction 
of false prophets into the church of God for true 
ones.—Ver. 11. He who is not content with his 
gift, finds fault with the all-wise God, and vexes 
himself about it in tain.—Ver. 12. As the head 
is united with the body, so is Christ united with 
his faithful ones (Col. i. 18).—Ver. 18, Baptism 
and the Lord’s Supper should remind us of our 
brotherly union. Through the former we be- 
come Christ’s members; through the latter we 
are ever more closely united with His body; and 
the longer it is observed, the more do we partake 
of the Spirit of God.—Ver. 14. Let the number 
of thy bodily members awaken in thee much holy 
astonishment, much gratitude, and much care not 
to offend thy Creator with any one of them.— 
Ver. 15-20. As in the human body each mem- 
ber has a special function for the good of the 
whole, so has every Christian a special gift from 


the Holy Spirit for the use and edification of 


Christendom. As one member has a larger and 
higher capacity than another, so also among 
Christians, one has more and richer gifts than 





261 





another.—Ver. 21. Those who have a keen in- 
sight into divine things (eyes) cannot dispense 
with those who hold practical offices (hands) ; 
the rulers (the head) cannot dispense with those 
who above all others bear the burdens of the 
church (feet).—The number, variety, and needs 
of the members and servants of the church, are 


in their inter-dependence necessary to it.—The 


highest of all needs the lowest of all, and so vice 
versa (Phil. ii. 25).—Ver. 22f. Those members 
in the spiritual body which are the weakest, and 
from which the church derives the least honor, 
should for this reason be maintained with the 
greatest care and pavience.—Ver. 24. God has 
wisely ordained that each one should abide in 
his own order; but men disturb the order, and 
dishonor the members which might and ought to 
be held in the highest honor, and adhere to 
others with a foolish pride, even when they have 
but little need of them (chap. vi. 15, 18; Is. iii. 
18f).—Ver. 25. The humblest Christian has as 
much in Christ, and is as truly a member of His 
body as the most distinguished. For this reason 
also there ought to be no divisions among Chris- 
tian believers, but rather a loving union (Eph. 
iv. 8, 15).—Ver. 26. This is the true communion 
of the spiritual body of Christ, when we feel and 
experience its weal and its ill, the one to our 
joy, and the other to our sorrow (Rom. xii. 
15f).—Ver. 27. Believers are all members of 
Christ, have one Head, and stand together in the 
unity of the faith and of the Spirit, so that they 
serve themselves of each other, and take part in 
each other’s joys and sufferings. But each one 
is a distinct member who has his ὑπ peculiar 
gifts and qualifications, and with these he should 
serve the others.—Ver. 28. The office of teacher 
is the most universal, and the most lasting, and 
embraces in itself, in part, professorships of the 
the higher and lower schools, wherein the teachers 
themselves are trained, and, partly, the office of 
pastor in the churches. ‘heir position ought 
even at this day to give evidence of its divine 
character, in the true spiritual qualification and 
fidelity they exhibit, and in their simple obedi- 
ence to the divine call, not running unless sent.— 
Ver. 29 ff. Because no one has everything, but 
each has need of another, it becomes all to use 
their own gifts for the service of others in hu- 
mility, self-discipline, order, and love.—Ver. 31. 
A church-minister, indeed every Christian, may 
well bestir himself to excel others in gifts, pro- 
vided he only use such gifts well and piously 
for the good of the church. 

SpENER :—This ‘“ excellent way” is a simple, 
true-hearted love, which in the eyes of many 
lofty spirits is a contemptible thing; yet it leads 
to the highest gifts, winding up a height so gra- 
dually that it takes a man at last to the loftiest 
summits without the slightest danger; while, on 
the contrary, those who are resolved on mounting 
straight up the rocks, fall headlong for the most 
part, or at last, cease from climbing, and find them- 
selves obliged to choose the more gradual path. 

Berens. Bipew:—Ver. 1. Such spiritual gifts 
afterwards became altogether unknown; yet this 
same God is still Lord over all, and just as 
giadly distributes His spiritual gifts, provided 
only faithful recipients can be found, who would 
use them in love and fidelity, and put them ta 


262 


interest for the general good. Man readily 
pounces on that which strikes the eye, and 
hence is very apt to leave out of account those 
gifts which belong to the very essence of Chris- 
tianity.— Ver. 2, What is leading you now? 
Whither are ye bound? Take care lest under 
the name of Christianity you be betrayed into 
devious paths.—Man precipitates himself into 
idolatry, and even makes an idol out of himself.— 
Ver. 3. If the Spirit of the crucified Saviour does 
not speak out of thee, then is all thy speech a 
disgrace to Him. The true knowledge of Jesus 
Christ in Spirit is the chief gift which will serve 
you as a proper sign. Other gifts without this 
even the devil may use for his own kingdom ; 
but the Holy Spirit does not lead to the achieve- 
ment of great things of which a man can boast, 
but to the humility of Jesus, who walked in 
the midst of sufferings. An infinite blessing 
is it, if the soul first recognizes Jesus as its 
Lord through the Holy Spirit; for as it is the 
Spirit Himself in us that confesses Christ to 
be a Lord, so does He fill us with faith, and love 
to Him. This is the blessed commencement 
of salvation.—Vv. 4-6. God gives Himself to the 
church in manifold ways; but Satan seeks to 
pervert everything which God does.—If God 
confers extraordinary gifts, take them and learn 
to use them in subordination,—just as the Apos- 
tles did who abode in the Spirit of God, walked 
in His presence, meant well with the people, and 
Β0 were in condition to oppose all abuses.—The 
various officers of the church should conspire to 
one result, for it is the same Lord on whom they 
all depend.—There may be never so many mat- 
ters in hand, and never so many instrumentali- 
ties, yet all issue from the same God from whom 
the Spirit proceeds, and by whom the Son is be- 
gotten. The power of the Spirit works by the 
command of God in the name of Christ.—The 
more we allow our working to yield to His work- 
ing, the greater will be our successes. It is idle 
to suppose that we can mark the presence of the 
Spirit in a little religious knowledge and in a 
few efforts though good in themselves; there 
must be in us a new spiritual life to give assu- 
rance of this. We must yield entirely to theinflu- 
ence of the Spirit, if we would have our work found 
perfect toward God.—Our growth is conditioned 
on holding fast to God by His Spirit. Those 
who have received Him, already understand this 
mystery, and see how it is that the Spirit always 
asks and receives in believers.—Ver. 7. Let us, 
first of all, take care that we be found pure and 
well qualified before God, so that He may trust 
us with what is right. Above all things, let us 
remain humble and in the exercise of the best 
gifts; for it is not the gifts which make us 
biessed, but faith which works by love. There- 
fore let every one see that he is made properly a 
partaker of Christ himself, the highest gift. 
The incidental gifts will then come to us as sup- 
plemental. That which God finds ready in the 
soul, He can purify and elevate and make use- 
ful for His service. He works what and how 
He wills with our own peculiar endowments, so as 
to evoke our praise in view of His own wonder- 
ful doings.—Something good lies with every one 
by which he may serve God and his neighbor, 


and also earn to himself a good degree in the fu- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
a ee ee 





ture. But it requires industry and constant self- 
watchfulness to be able to observe and trace out 
the object to which the dear God calls and draws 
us, and discover what His motive, His gift is, 
which works in us.—Ver. 8. As wisdomis the gift 
of insight that enables us to look profoundly inte 
things: knowledge on the contrary goes to the 
right appropriation of all the various divine doc- 
trines, disciplines and testimonies.—As in God 
there is a depth of riches, both of wisdom and 
of knowledge, so there will also flow such power 
into the sucklings of his wisdom as to make 
them luminous within.—Ver. 9. That saving 
faith, which seeks for mercy and purification 
through the blood of Jesus in the Holy Spirit, we 
all must have. But with this we can enter 
courageously upon everything, since the power 
of the Spirit waxes so strong in the soul through 
the new birth, that it is able to do all things in 
Christ, yea, even bind and constrain God Him- 
self in faith, that He may show the wonders of 
his Omnipotence, Holiness, Wisdom, Goodness, 
in any particular matter, and in all circumstan- 
ces in which His honor is involved. To this it 
may be added that by means of earnest prayer, 
many ‘‘a spirit of infirmity” may be driven out 
in faith.—Ver. 10. In as much as there is such 
a diversity of spirits and powers, and the eyil 
one gets up so many strange shows, and practises 
such trickery both before and in men, especially 
where something good exists, or is just coming 
to light, it is very needful to have the gift of test- 
ing and distinguishing between them. And this 
gift is imparted to many friends of God. Yet it 
becomes every Christian also to pray for some- 
thing at least of this gift, in order to guard him- 
self from treacherous men, who even transform 
themselves into angels of light.—By the gift of 
tongues the Spirit snatches again from Satan’s 
hand the plurality of tongues. Indeed, it is 
favor enough to be able to express the mind of 
the Spirit, and the divine mysteries, ways and 
purposes according to their proper grounds.— 
Ver. 11. The chariot of God has several wheels; 
but it is one Spirit which drives the wheels and 
works allin all.—The Spirit leaves none empty 
save those whom it finds incapable and closed 
against His influences. In this matter He deals 
‘“‘as He will;” but He wills no otherwise than 
as He finds good and needful for each one.—If 
we would enjoy the true source and compendious 
summary of all divine gifts and powers, we ought 
continually to beseech God for His holy love, 
which is the inexhaustible treasure of all good. 
He who seeks this, hits the thing most surely, 
and continues guarded against the temptations 
which accompany all the higher gifts.—Ver. 12, 
The members together with the Head form one 
Christ (Gal. iii. 28). Christ stands for all. On 
this account His personality is preserved and 
the singular number maintained.—Ver. 18. The 
two sacraments, ἢ, δ., the objects themselves 
which they represent, should so unite Christians 
that they will never suffer themselves to be sep- 
arated from one another in regard to particular 
powers.—Vy. 14-27. Do not be envious because 
thou canst not be as active as others. The 
question does not turn upon the magnitude of 
the work done, or upon thy sharp-sightedness 
or keenness of wit, but upon the state of thy 


\ 


᾿ 





it 


CHAP. XII. 





heart and the quality of thy faith. Attend 
to thy business and be satisfied with thy lot. 
God will reward according to His will.—Since 
the church is a Lazaretto, we have most to do 
with the weakest. Nevertheless no man there 
exists in vain. The more humble and lowly a 
man is, the more does he deserve our esteem. 
Many a man whom the world despises, does 
greater works inysecret than some great saints 


.who parade themselves before the eyes of men. 


The wretched should be looked after. Those 
members which are the most needy, should be 
most cared for.—Members of one body should 
hold together in joy and sorrow. Insensibility 
is the mark of a putrefied or dead member. A 
true heart is not satisfied at having things go 
well with itself alone; hence it is wont to in- 
trude unsolicited upon the wretchedness and sor- 
rows of others. Those who maintain the appella- 
tion ‘‘Christ’s body and members” in truth, are 
of one heart and mind with the Head, follow Him 
wherever He goes and do what He wills.—Ver. 
28 ff. All must have the will to be helpers; but, 
in actual practice, some are better equipped for 
help than others.—Ver. 31. All proper gifts 
come to us through the cross, or must be pre— 
served by means of it.—Knowledge is not the 
best gift. God is love, and this is the first and 
most distinguished among the gifts of the Spirit. 
(Gal. v. 22). 

Riecrern:—Vy. 1-8. The spirit of the world 
has sometimes observed that it can never crowd 
Christ, and His kingdom, and the truth of His 
gospel entirely from the earth; for this reason it 
endeavors to introduce its spirit and work into 
Christianity. Hence the necessity, at all times, 
for proving false spirits and separating from 
them. The world of to-day has become so impa- 
tient and incredulous in respect to any great ad- 
vantage arising from spiritual knowledge, gifts, 
operations, and experiences, that it is disposed 
to deride and bring into contempt everything 
which cannot be included under the law of na- 
ture and reason. The labor of proving much, 
and the danger of being betrayed strip it of 
everything. But on this very account does it 
plunge into the greatest self-deception. O Lord 
Jesus! whether 1 live or die, my communion with 
Thee is my boasting and my hope. This have I 
learned from Thy Holy Spirit, and in this truth 
do I ever desire to be led onward.—Vy. 4-11. 
From the one fountain of the Spirit, opened 
through Jesus, ought we to learn to draw mani- 
fold streams, preserving the unity in the variety 
of the distribution, By means of gifts, offices, 
and powers, the Spirit commits Himself to the 
church for the common endowment of the saints, 
for the edifying of the body of Christ, and these 
things stand related to each other, and help to- 
ards the attainment of a common end. This 


\ yutual codperation of powers, offices, and gifts, 


is the more necessary to observe, the more se- 


cr|Setly grace works, and imparts its blessings 
th: }rough the employment of our natural powers. 
Gr. | ace and its gifts certainly improve and elevate 
nate ure, but do not altogether change or absorb 


it. 


i People of great natural powers often remain 


wis shout grace, and hence without the gifts of 


thee 2 Spirit. 








the Spirit abundantly compensate for the de. 
fects. By wisdom we learn to recognize and ex- 
perience the truth in its broader scope, and in 
its emancipating power. Knowledge occupies 
itself more with the truth in faith and act, and 
with instruction unto salvation, and draws more 
from the word of God than from all the works 
of God, and the wisdom manifest therein. As it 
regards the gifts of the Spirit, nothing can be 
merited, nothing affected, nothing forced. The 
Spirit gives and works as He will.—Vv. 12-3]. 
Men of the world love to overshadow the gifts of 
others by their own. Christians love to serve 
each other with the gifts which God has given 
them. The manifold necessities of our condition 
require a diversity of gifts. For the poor and 
the suffering, there is needed pity, and the ability 
to sympathize; for the sick, the old and weak, 
hands to give, and feet to carry; for the young, 
the ignorant, the erring, teachers who are fur- 
nished with eyes, and who are furnished with 
tongues, to speak at the right time; for those 
who are still afar off, but whom God will never- 
theless call, those who are ready to proclaim the 
gospel; for those who are desirous of wisdom, 
help is furnished by still other gifts.—No one 
should undervalue himself, and still less should 
any one contemn another’s practice; all the mem- 
bers should care for each other, should rejoice 
and suffer in common. Away with that self- 
loving, self-pleasing creature, who thinks to 
make himseif independent of his brethren! 
Away with all exultation in another’s fall, with 
whispering and slandering, with everything 
which leads to provocation, and jealousy, and 
separation, and confusion.—We strive after the 
best and most useful gifts when we approach 
the dear God with humility, faith, and prayer, 
beseeching Him that He will never suffer either 
His church, or ourselves to be wanting in good 
spiritual gifts, or in obedience, or in aptness to 
devote self to the common good; and when, to 
this end, we put out of the way everything 
which tends to produce contempt, and envy, and 
offence. There is more utility in the most per- 
fect love than in all the highest gifts without it. 
Ah, Lord Jesus, show Thy living power in me, 
so that I may be found a steadfast, friendly, and 
useful member in Thy body! 

Hrevusner:—Vy. 1-11. The unity of all spi- 
ritual gifts.—Ver. 1. Spiritual gifts may further 
much, and also do much damage. Thereis need 
of warning to prevent our being misled by gifted 
ones.—Ver. 2. The living God only speaks and 
reveals Himself by His Spirit. He who does not 
know the true God and Christ is, nevertheless, 
betrayed, bewitched, or blinded by some idol. 
Satan leads men blindfold; they are compelled 
to go, with eyes bound, whithersoever sin leads 
them.—Ver. 8. He who is truly inspired, can 
never doubt the truthfulness, the Word, or the 
divine mission of Jesus; he must entirely agree 
with the Word of Jesus. Where the church is 
in general repute, there men do not openly curse 
and anathematize it; but the secret hostility in 
the depths of the heart remains the same. Where 
Jesus is evil-spoken of, there a good spirit is 
wanting. The more sympathy exists with Christ, 


With others the natural powers are | and the more harmony with the gospel, the more 


eo ‘dparatively small; but grace, and the gifts of | there is of the Spirit of God. In order to believe 


264 





on Jesus with the whole soul, there is needed a 
heart enlightened and purified by the Holy 
Ghost.—Ver. 4. In the various spiritual gifts 
vouchsafed by Divine grace, or pervaded by the 
Holy Spirit, and destined for the service of the 
church, God glorifies Himself just as wonderfully 
as in the manifold works of nature.—Ver. 5. In 

the call to any office there is this holiest and most 
’ constraining thought, the Lord chooses thee for 
His servant. This alone makes the office great; 
not external honor, and glory, andinfluence. A 
faithful school-master has just as high an office 
as the highest spiritual bishop.—Ver. 6. In the 
office everything is wrought by means of the 
gifts. Of these God is the primal source. Thou 
canst not stir a finger except God wills.—Ver. 8. 
Even the gift for inquiry and speculation must 
proceed from the Holy Spirit, otherwise it leads 
away from the truth.—Ver. 9. It is not every 
bclieving Christian that has faith’s courage. 
Melancthon believed as much as Luther did in 
the atonement through Christ, but Luther’s he- 
roic spirit he had not. 

BressER:—Vy. 4-6. As the sevenfoldness of 
the Spirit of God (Rey. i. 4; iv. 5; v. 6; Zech. iv. 
10) does not break up its unity, but is only an 
image of the manifold fulness which lies included 
in that unity, and which works itself out in a 
series of revealing acts, so the distinction or di- 
vision in the gifts of grace does not destroy the 
unity of their origin and end; rather the per- 
sonal unity of the Giver as well as the united 
membership of those endowed with the gifts, are 
thereby made known, so thatthe various gifts are 
parts of one whole, the one pointing to the other, 
and each completing each. The triune control 
of the three Divine persons runs through the 
church in the matter of its edification (although 
sanctification is in particular the work of the 
Holy Spirit); the Spirit kindles the fire of the 
gifts of edification, the Son orders the rays of 
the offices for edification, and the Father creates 
the warmth of the powers for edification. In- 
separable in being, the triune God rules His 
church; what a crime then is it to produce 
schism therein.—Ver. 7. Woe to the selfish and 
the carnal (Chap. iii. 8), who employ for schis- 
matic ends that which was given them to sub- 
serve the general good of the whole body! And 
woe to that idle servant who buries his talent !— 
Ver. 12. Christendom is not a collection of in- 
dividual Christian persons who walk beside each 
other, each one for himself in his own way; 
neither is ita union of Christian friends, who have 
arbitrarily or voluntarily associated themselves 
after that they had separately become possessed 
of Christianity. But they arein’a spiritual way, 
what the body is in a natural way ; —one whole 
consisting of many parts that exist for each 
other, and subsist through each other. 

{[Scorr:— Vv. 15-25. ‘Our kind Creator hath 
effectually provided that there should be no 
schism in our natural body, but He has for wise 
reasons seen good to make trial of the members 
of the mystical body of Christ in this respect 
and through the remainder of error and sin inreal 
Christians, through the intrusion of hypocrites 
and the artifices of the enemy; many disgraceful 
and lamentable divisions still prevail, which we 
should pray against and endeavor to heal to 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


\ 





the utmost of our power and with persevering 
earnestness”? ]. 

Vers. 1-11. Pericope for the seventh Sunday 
after Trinity. The Holy Spirit is the highest of all 
God’s gifts: 1. In Himself, because the foun- 
tain of all true life; a. for without Him, manis 
far from God, a slave of the evil spirit (ver. 2) ; 
b. through Him, man first learns to believe in 
Christ and to worship Him(ver. 3). 2. Through 
His particular operations; a. He is the cause 
that everything serves for one end, viz., the 
glory of God and the salvation of men (vv. 4-7) ; 
b. He awakens the gifts and powers residing 
in each individual, and sanctifies them (ver. 11). 
The manifestations of the Holy Spirit in the hearts 
of men: 1. In general, by regeneration and re- 
newal; a. turning from sin and idolatry ; b. turn- 
ing to Christ. 2. In particular, by imparting 
various powers for the use of the Christian 
church; a. He arouses spiritual activity; b. 
He designates each one to his office; c. He 
makes each one an instrument of God; d. ren- 
ders him a blessing to the congregation. — 
Vy. 12-81. The perfect unity of Christians is 
grounded in Christ, and is preserved through Him. 
The church is a spiritual body: 1. One whole 
like the body; 2. Pervaded by the Spirit of its 
Head, as the body is by one living power; 3. 
Diversity of powers and functions, as of mem- 
bers; 4. All serving one as all members work 
toward one object; 5. Mutual imparting of the 
powers of life,—edification, (health),—contami- 
nation, (disease); the more sound blood in the 
rest, the more ready healing of the sick; 6. 
Combination, even for particular objects, socie- 
ties, brotherhoods, which may not, however, 
sever themselves from each other, but must re- 
main united in one whole,—Baptism and the 
Lord’s Supper, the means of union, their efficient 
principle, the Spirit.—Neither lowliness nor ex- 
altedness of station releases from obligation to the 
church. Every legitimate and necessary calling 
forms a member of the same; a sorry notion isit 
to think of withdrawing oneself under certain 
pretexts from taking part in laboring for its wel- 
fare.—-All love is service, living for others. This 
pre-supposes manifoldness; without manifold- 
ness there is no society, the very essence of 
which is the union of the manifold for one end, 
What each one should be and do, that God has 
ordained; to each one has He appointed his po- 
sition and calling and activity and worth. No 
one prescribes to Himaught. Let each one only 
learn what God wills of him. He who is dis- 
satisfied with this arrangement, quarrels with 
God. The glory of each one consists in being 
that for which God has called, endowed, and 


5 


ι 
, 


created him.—Without ἃ variety of members, the Ἢ 
body would be one formless lump.—No member,.,g 
should think that he stands in no need of anim); 
other.—The mutual influence of the members ij,yos 
grounded upon the most intimate sympathy,;,,1. 
The life of a Christian church should be a co: ἐρῃ- 
stant spiritual intercourse, a circulation of spij,.).r- 
itual blood. The more intimate this mutual pe,...r- 
ticipation is, the more perfect the life & nd 


soundnesss of the whole. 


Should stagnation <q, re 


cur, the whole suffers. Each person can be onanely 


? 
. 


one thing, and should therefore not desire ‘¢ ¢jto 


have another office. —The office, not even thoug 


th 


CHAP. XIII. 1-13. 





it be the highest, gives no claim to salvation. 
Only the absolute gift, that of love, of the pure 
heart ensures this. The most excellent way is 
not that which leads to eternal preferment, but 
that which gives the highest value to the heart. 

[Haruxss, Serm.:—Vvy. 1-11. The blessings 
accruing from the communion in Christ. I. It de- 
livers us from the dumb idols which we serve. 
II. This it accomplishes through the unity of the 
Spirit—which, III., teaches us to serve in the 
manifoldness of our gifts, offices and powers— 
IV., the one Lord Jesus Christ. 

Sourn:—Ver. 4. The Christian Pentecost, or the 
solemn effusion of the Holy Ghost in the several mi- 
raculous gifts conferred upon the Apostles and first 
Christians. I. What those gifts were. II. What 
is imported and to be understood by their diver- 
sity. 1. It includes variety. 2. It excludes 
contrariety. III. What are the consequences of 
this emanation of so many and different gifts 
from one and the same Spirit. 1. We infer the 
deity of the Holy Ghost. 2. We infer the duty 
of humility in some, and contentment in others. 
8. We have here a touchstone for the trial of 
spirits. 

RoBertTson :—The dispensation of the Spirit. 
I. Spiritual gifts conferred on individuals. 1. 
Natural—i. e., those capacities originally found 
in human nature elevated and enlarged by the 
gift of the Spirit. 2. Supernatural—e. g., gift 
of tongues and of prophecy. Obs. 1. The high- 
est of these not accompanied with spiritual fault- 
lessness. 2. Those higher in one sense were 
lower in another. 11. The spiritual unity of the 
church—‘‘ the same spirit.” 1. All real unity 
is manifold. 2. All diving unity is spiritual, not 
formal — not sameness, but complexity. 3. 
None but a spiritual unity can preserve the 
rights both of the individual and the church. 
4. The sanctity of the individual character re- 
spected. ; 

Owrn:—Ver. 11. Ministerial endowments the 
work of the Holy Spirit. 1. Our Lord hath pro- 
mised to be present with His church unto the 
end of the world. II. He is thus present prin- 
cipally and fundamentally by His Spirit. III. 
This presence of the Spirit is promised and given 
by an everlasting covenant. IV. Hence the mi- 
nistry of the Gospel is ‘the ministry of the Spi- 
rit.” V. The general end why the Spirit is 
thus promised. VI. Particular proof of the 
proposition that the Holy, Ghost thus promised, 


\ 


265 





sent, and given, doth furnish ministers with 
spiritual abilities in the discharge of their work. 
VII. Spiritual gifts as bestowed unto this end 
are necessary for it. VIII. That there is a com- 
munication of spiritual gifts in gospel ordinances 
supported by experience. Prac. Obs. 1. The 
ministry of the gospel most dificult ministration, 
and great as difficult. 2. A glorious work. 3. 
The-only effectual ministry. 

Baxter :—Ver. 12. The true Catholic and Catholie 
Church described. Doct. The universal church being 
the body of Christ, is but one, and all true Chris- 
tians are members of which it doth consist. I. Di, 
versity of membership as to, 1. Age, or standing in 
Christ. 2. Strength. 3. Gifts. 4. Mental com- 
plexion. 5. Spiritual health. 6. Usefulness. 7. 


Office. 8. Employment. 9. Title to be loved 
and honored. 10. Glory. IJ. The unity of the 
membership. 1. All have one God the Father. 


2. And one Head and Saviour Jesus Christ. 8, 
One Holy Ghost dwelling in, illuminating and 
sanctifying them. 4. One principal, ultimate 
end. 5. One gospel. 6. One kind of faith. 7. 
One new holy nature. 8. The same objects of 
affection, and the same affections. 9. One rule 
or law. 10. One and the same covenant. 11. 
The same instrumental founders of his faith un- 
der Christ. 12. Membership in the body. 18. 
Habitual love to every other member. 14. Spe- 
cial love to the whole body of the Church. 15. 
Special love towards the nobler sort of members. 
16. An inward inclination to hold communion 
with fellow-members, so far as they are discerned 
to be members indeed. 17. An inward inclina- 
tion for the means of grace. 18. The same holy 
employment. 19. An inward enmity to what is 
destructive to itself or to the body. a. to sin in 
general; ὁ. to all known sin in particular; c. 
specially to divisions, distractions, and diminu- 
tions of the church. 20. The same crown of glory, 
the same blessed God, the same celestial Jerusa- 
lem, the same services of joy and praise. Appli- 
cation: 1. To those who deny the very being of 
the Catholic Church. 2. To those who are per- 
plexed to know which is the church. 3. To the 
several sects that would appropriate the church 
to themselves only. 4. To the papists that ask 
for a proof of the continued visibility of our 
church, and where it was before Luther. 

MELVILLE :—Ver. 21. The least of service to the 
greatest]. 


as ‘|The measure of the worth and the rule of the use of the gifts; love, its worth (ver. 


38 


gifts (ver. 8 5... 


6 


8 
if 


4 1ff.), nature (ver. 4ff.), and eternal duration, in contrast with the transient 


i CHapTer XIII. 1-13. 


:, Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity [love, 


2 ἃ ἀγάπην], I am become [have become, γέγονα] as sounding brass, or a tinkling [clat: 


256 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





2 tering, ἀλαλάξον] cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand 

all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove 
3 mountains, and have not charity [love, ἀγάπην], I am nothing. And though I bestow 
all my goods to feed the poor [have fed out (in morsels) all my goods, φωμίσω πάντα 
τὰ (nipyovrd], and though I give [have delivered up, παραδῶ] my body to be burned,? 
and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; 
charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself [sheweth not itself off, περπερεώεταιῆ, 
is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily 
provoked [whetted up to anger, παροξύνεται], thinketh no evil [makes no account of 
the evil, λογίζεται τὸ xaxdv]; Rejoiceth not in [at the, ἐπὶ τῇ iniquity, but rejoiceth in 
[along with, συγχαίρες] the truth; Beareth [puts up with, στέγει] all things, believeth 
all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. 
ἐχπέπτει] ὃ but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail [come to nought, zarapyy- 
θήσονται]; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, 
9 it shall vanish away [come to nought, χαταργηϑήσεται]. Fort we know in part, and we 


lo ok Mor) or ἐς 


10 prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then [om. then] that which: 


11 is in part shall be done away [come to nought, χαταργηϑήσεται]. When I was a child, 
I spake as a child, I understood [perceived, ἐφρόνουν] as a child, I thought [reasoned, 
ἐλογιζόμην] asa child: but [om. but] when 1 became a man, I put away [brought to 
nought, χατήργηκα] childish things. For now we see through a glass [as by a mirror, δὲ 
ἐσόπτρου, darkly [in an enigma, ἐν αἰνίγματι); but then face to face: now i know 
in part; but then shall 1 know [fully know, ἐπιγνώσομαι even as also 1 am known 
13 [was fully known, ἐπεγνώσϑην] And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three ; 
but the greatest of [greater among, μείζων τούτων] these is charity. 


12 


1 Ver. 3.—The Rec. has ψωμίζω, but in opposition to the most decisive authorities. [The Elzevir form of Ψωμέζω is 
sustained only by B. (Mai), K., some cursives, and Damasc. (Par.). The colloquial use of the Ind. Present for the Subj. Aor. 
prevailed in the later Greek, as is common in a similar form in English, but it could hardly have been allowed by Paul. 
It may have come into the text from the similar pronunciation in dictation.—C, P. W.]. 

2 Ver. 3—Some old MSS. (and with them agrees Lachmann) have καυχήσωμαι. The evidence in its favor is not, how- 
ever, quite satisfactory. See Exeg. notes. [for the reading καυθήσωμαι, which is given in the Rec. and adopted by 
Bloomy., Meyer, Alford, Stanley, and Wordsworth, we have C. K., a number of versions, Chrys., Theodt., several Lat. Fa- 
thers, and Jacob (Nisib.). For καυχήσωμαι (which Meyer says that even Lachmann has now given up) we have A. B. 
(though Mai has καυχήσομαι), Sinzit., Aeth., Copt., (MS.), Ephr., Jerome (who remarks that among the Greeks the copies 
differ, and that among the Latins an error had crept in on account of the resemblance between καυθήσωμαι and καυχήσωμαι. 
On internal grounds, καυχήσ. seems like an addition to make prominent the possibility that such sacrifices might be per- 
formed without love, and to avoid the objection that martyrdoms by fire were almost unknown in the Apostle’s time. The 
Subj. Future was, however, a barbarism which could not be expected in writers as early as those of the N. T., and as pure 
as the Apostle Paul. Tischendorf, Griesbach, and Stanley (in his note) have preferred the Ind. Fut. (καυθήσομαι), which 
might be easily changed by a careless copyist into the Subjunctive. This reading is supported by Ὁ. HE. F. G. L., some 
cursives, Macar., Max., and Clemens Alex.—C. P. W.] 

3 Ver. 8.—Lachmann has πίπτει after A. B. C. [Sinait. 17] and some Fathers. Meyer regards ἐκπίπτει (Rec.) as a gloss 
to define more particularly what the Apostle meant. [Ttschendorf prefers ἐκπίπτει, as it has in its favor C. (8d hand), D. E. 
F. G. K. L., almost all the cursives, many versions (Vulg. has exczdzt, and different copies have excidet, excedit and cadit) 
and most of the Greek and some Latin Fathers. Comp. Rom. ix.6.—O.P. W.]. ᾿ 

4 Ver. 9.—Tischendorf has δέ, but the best MSS. are in favor of yap. 

5 Ver. 10.—The Rec. inserts τότε before τὸ ἐκ μέρους, but against the largest number, and to some extent the best, of the 
MSS. It appears to have been an addition from ver. 12. [It is foundin Ὁ. ye and 3d hand) E. (τότε καὶ) K. L. Syr. (both), 
Orig., Melet. (in Epiph.), Theodt.; but it is omitted in A. B.D. (1st hand) F.G. and eight others, the Ital., Vulg., Goth., Copt., 
Aeth. (both), and a number of the Greek Fathers.—C. P. W.]. 

6 Ver. 11—In the Rec. ὡς νήπιος is put before the verb in each of the three clauses. Tischendorf, in each case, sets 
these words after the verb. The MSS. are not decisive in behalf of either arrangement. [These words are before the verb 
in Ὁ. E. F. G. K. L. et al.; the Ital., Vulg. (Fuld.), Syr. (both), and a number of the Greek and Latin Fathers. A. B., Sinait., 
ΤΡ Vulg., Οορῦ., Aeth., and a similar number of the Greek Fathers, with Jerome and August., place them after.— 

* P. Ww. . ΕΣ 
7 Ver.11.—The Rec. inserts a δέ after the second ὅτε, but in opposition to the best authorities. 


and purest sense—a love which embraced as its 


Charity never faileth [falls away, 


And this is ” 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[The ‘supremely excellent way,” by which 
to ascertain the best gifts and to regulate their 
use, is the subject which occupies the whole of 
this chapter. This way is in the original termed 
ἀγάπη, unhappily translated in our version in 
accordance with the Vulg. by the word charity, 
which is by no means its English equivalent. 
The substantive ἀγάπη from the verb ἀγαπάω is, 
as Trench remarks, ‘‘a purely Christian word, 
no example of its use occurring in any heathen 
writer whatever,” and it was employed by the 


proper objects both God and man. 
the rendering adopted by the translators Tinda\ 
and Cranmer as well as in the Geneva version ¢ 
and it is to be regretted that the precedent here 
set has not been followed in the version of Kin; 
James, inasmuch as the word ‘‘charity,” adopt 

in this connection, has given rise to many errors 
of thought and practice. Many have in consie- 
quence been led to think that alms-giving ajnd 
kindness to the sick and the poor is the syim 
total of all religion, because of the super/or 
worth here ascribed to charity, exalting it abowe 
both faith and hope. But what the Apostle hejre 


inspired writers, to denote dove in its highest | speaks of, is not any one particular virtue or, 


aun 


a 


CHAP. XIII. 1-18. 


267 





grace, but that which is the root and spring of 
all virtues and graces, and which to possess is 
to be both like God and in God. In describing 
and recommending this fundamental grace, there- 
fore the Apostle might well be expected to en- 
large most eloquently. Accordingly, we have 
here presented to us a chapter which, as HopGE 
well remarks, “for moral elevation, for rich- 
ness and comprehensiveness, for beauty and 
felicity of expression, has been the admiration 
of the Church in all ages.” Paul here exhibits 
to us love after the manner of a jeweller hand- 
ling the most precious gem of his cabinet, turn- 
ing it on every side, shewing it in varied lights, 
and holding it up to view in a way best fitted to 
awaken desire for its possession. As TERTULLIAN 
says, ‘‘ his description of love is uttered totis Spi- 
ritus viribus, with all the strength of the Spirit’’]. 
Ver. 1. The worth of love is first set forth 
negatively, by the assertion of the utter worth- 
lessness even of the highest endowments and of 
the greatest self-sacrifices, when not associated 
with it. [‘‘In this passage there is a climax 
throughout. He begins with mentioning the gift 
of tongues, as it was against the exaggerated 
estimate of this, that he had chiefly to contend.” 
Srantey. ].—Though,—’Edv, supposing that; 
he here imagines a case which might possibly 
occur—‘‘a case in the future,’ as MryER says, 
‘the realization of which must be known by the 
event.”—I speak with the tongues, ταῖς 
γλώσσαις; the article indicates the thing in 
general—‘ with all possible tongues.’ And these 
he exhibits in their highest conceivable develop- 
ment,—of men and of angels.—If we adopt 
the rendering languages, we shall have to insist 
on the idea that there were various classes of 
angels, and then assume either various modes of 
spiritual communication among them, or a diver- 
sity in the forms of expression used, according 
to their various orders and ranks without in- 
volving, however, any such rupture or dishar- 
mony as appears in human languages and dia- 
lects. But if we adopt the rendering tongues as 
meaning organs of speech, then we must suppose 
a reference here to some mighty jubilation, rung 
out in all the fullness of tone of which angels 
and men were capable. Busser says, ‘‘ with 
angel tongues whereby the glory of God’s face, 
as beheld by them, is set forth.” Ewatp says, 
‘« with tongues far more wonderful and enchant- 
ing than those employed on earth by the ordinary 
speakers with tongues who could not like the 
angels adopt a purely heavenly strain.” Weare 
at any rate to reject the interpretation of Hey- 
denreich, who takes the expression to denote all 
sorts of tongues in general, and that of Calvin, 
wrho regards this as “ἃ hyperbolical expression 
Ne denote what is singular or distinguished ;* 
of \ that of others, who take it simply as implying 
infme eloquence higher than human. [ALFoRD 
jectis, ‘‘it is hardly possible to understand yAdo- 
here of anything but articulate forms of 
-.-π᾿--- --------- 
Chrys.,>is is also Stanley’s view, and it certainly commends 
older En person’s commonsense; and is moreover sustained 
ner, Suidrder of the words, “though with the tongues of 
sense: ‘ deak, or even of angels.” The latter seems thus to 
sideratelyas an after-thought, added simply for the sake of 


loves botkhe statement as stroug as possible, and not with 


ments.” 4ct idea that angels used either tongues or lan- 
pretation, q 


decision). 











speech,” and so also Hodge].—and have not 
love.—«aydry in this connection means that 
brotherly affection which excludes all self-seek- 
ing in the possession and use of gifts, and is di- 
rected exclusively to the furtherance of the wel- 
fare of the brotherhood. It implies a perfect. 
acceptance of the divine life as the principle of 
all action—a pervading of the entire dispositiom 


by the fundamental moral nature of God, while: 


in the particular gifts the several sides of human 
life are laid hold of and fashioned by the opera-- 
tions of the divine power; or, in other words,. 
special forms of life and action are combined. 
with divine powers which all necessarily pre-- 
suppose a perfect union of the human will with 
the divine will, and that perfection of the divine. 
life which is implied in love. (Comp. also Matt. 
vii. 22). Osiander states the matter somewhat. 
differently, p. 580. NranpDER well asks here: 
“ΠΟΥ shall we conceive of that which can only 
proceed from the power of a Christian life as 
existing, where the very principle of that life, 
even love, is wanted?” To this he replies: “1. 
may indeed happen that the Christian life actu-- 
ally existed in a man, though in a troubled state,, 
love having departed, while yet the power it gave,, 
continues a while longer, just as a chord con-- 
tinues to vibrate after it has once been smitten.. 
It is possible also that the particular gift itself. 
may lead to the fall, through the selfishness: 
which fastens upon it and perverts it to its own 
ends.”—I have become, γέγονα, i. e., by the: 
reception of such gifts as that mentioned; [or~ 
as Honce better says, ‘‘through the mere want. 
of love which notwithstanding the gift in ques- 
tion would reduce me to a level with—sounding 
brass.” ]—This denotes, not exactly a brazen mu- 
sical instrument, but any resonant piece of brass. 
The instrument is first specified in the following—- 
or a clanging cymbal,—an instrument like a 
hollow basin which struck by another of the same: 
sort emits a shrill, clanging sound (comp. 2 Sam.. 
vi. 5). [Foradescription of the cymbal in its sev- 
eral varieties see SmiTu’s Dic. of the Bib.]. The: 
verb ἁλαλάζειν is onomatopoeticand was formed to: 
express the loud yell with which an army rushed 
into battle; and then from this it came to mean. 
the making of any loud noise. The epithet hereis. 
certainly suggestive rather of loud and confused: 
exclamation’ on the part of the speakers with: 
tongues [so Hodge, referring to xiv. 23], than of. 
any such muttering in low and scarcely audible: 
tones as some have ascribed to them. But to 
suppose an intimation intended of the repulsive- 
ness and annoyance of the din occasioned by. 
them, as Chrysostom does, is hardly warranted.* 
The point of the comparison is, as ΜΈΥΒΕ states 
it, that ‘the man who speaks with never so. 
many tongues, and is at the same time devoid. 
of love, becomes but the organ of a foreign im- 
pulse, without independent worth,’ and, as Brs- 
seR adds, ‘having neither emotion nor consci- 
ousness.”—and though I have prophecy,—- 


eee 


*[Why not? If there are any who deserve to be “ countedi 
as giving impertinent trouble, as an annoying and weari- 
some sort of persons,” to use Chrysostom’s language, they 
are those loud-mouthed talkers and exhorters who some~ 
times appear in the church as possessed of a marvellous gift 
of tongues, but utterly devoid of the wisdom and modesty 
of love; “sounding brass and clanging cymbal” are not 
more intolerable than they]. 


208 





t. 6.. the gift of prophecy. This in Paul’s view 
was something higher than the former, because 
it contributed more to the edification of the 
Church, and furthermore, because it was combined 
with a clear self-consciousness which was want- 
ing in the other case, Yet, excellent as this gift 
was, we see in the instance of Balaam (2 Pet. ii. 
15; Num. xxii.) [also of Caiaphas, Jno. xi. 49 ff. ] 
how worthless it is when not united with love. 
But how are we to connect this with that next 
mentioned ?—and know all the mysteries 
and all knowledge.—Are these particulars 
only designations of the degrees in which the 
gift of prophecy was had? or are they special 
gifts? The former is apparently sustained by 
, the fact that the particles “‘and though” are 
not repeated until we come to the next gift, and 
so the three seem included under one head (so 
Meyer). But although ‘the knowledge of mys- 
teries,’ as implying a supernatural revelation 
like that in prophecy, may suit with this con- 
struction, yet the other expression “all know- 
ledge” is just as far the other way (see on xii. 
8). [Besides, Paul elsewhere distinguishes be- 
tween prophecy and knowledge (ver. 8 and xii. 8-- 
10); and to this it may be added that the words 
‘mysteries’ and ‘knowledge’ depend not on “1 
have,” but ‘Iknow’]. Hence it were betterto un- 
derstand him as speaking of separate gifts pro- 
ceeding from the divine illumination and serving 
to enlighten others. The first of these, ‘the know- 
ledge of mysteries’ (which possibly may be the 
same as ‘“ wisdom,” xii. 8), implies a direct in- 
sight into the secret counsels of God as brought 
out in the great plan of redemption. This, in- 
deed, could not be had without revelation, such 
as that which forms the basis also of prophecy, 
from which it is distinguished also by the nature 
of the objects involved ; while it itself forms the 
‘basis rather of instruction. But inasmuch as 
the prophet may be at the same time an earnest 
inquirer, and through the help of the Spirit, 
may become a profound explorer into the truth 
of God’s revelation, there is nothing in the na- 
‘ture of the case to prevent our accepting Meyer’s 
view as expressed above. The extent of these 
gifts is represented as the greatest conceivable 
‘by the repeated use of the term ‘‘all.”—The 
union of the words ‘‘and all knowledge” di- 
rectly with the verb “1 know,” gives rise to the 
constructio conjugati (Osiander), or a zeugma* 
(Meyer), so that instead of “1 know” you must 
supply some such verb as ‘I have.’—And 
though I have all faith,—i. ¢., faith in its 
whole extent and fullest measure. The word 
‘there means a power of will energized by faith 
(Neander).—so that I could remove moun- 
tains,—. 6., so as to be able to accomplish that 
which transcends our natural powers, and ap- 
pears impossible. (Comp. Matt. xvii. 20; xxi. 
21). The expression can hardly be derived 
from a supposed tradition of Christ’s speeches, 
but must rather be taken as a current proverb. 
[Inasmuch as the term faith is used in a variety 
‘of senses, we must be careful to observe the 
special signification in which it is here employed. 
‘Chrysostom calls it ‘the faith of miracles,” 
ΓΑ ficure of speech by which an adjective or verb which 


agrees with a nearer word, is, by way of supplement, referred 
ito another more remote. and perhaps less suited to it). 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—— α΄ 4 


that which apprehends Christ simply in His 
wonder-working power, and may sometimes 
exist in an unsanctified person, like Judas. 
Nothing can be inferred therefore from Paul's 
statement here to the disparagement of faith ag 
the fundamental grace of the Christian life 
(Calvin)].—I am nothing.—A short and ex- 
pressive statement of the result. Without love, 
though endowed with these most remarkable 
gifts which are so highly esteemed and cap- 
able of such use, and which seem to indicate 
a special divine favor, a person is in fact a mere 
nullity. [‘*They do not elevate his character, 
or render him worthy of respect or confidence. 
Satan may have, and doubtless has, more of in- 
telligence and power than any man ever pos- 
sessed, and yet he is Satan still. Those, there- 
fore, who seek to exalt men by the mere culti- 
vation of the intellect, are striving to make 
Satans of them.” Hopar].— He advances in 
the climax by next mentioning acts which are 
regarded as the exercises of a love of the most 
ardent and self-sacrificing kind, but which are, 
nevertheless, affirmed to avail nothing when de- 
void of their proper actuating spirit. Such acts 
are but the outward forms of love, which may be 
performed under the promptings of a refined 
selfishness and vanity; or,as Besser says, ‘‘are 
the forth-puttings of a self-will, which, being de- 
void of love, expends itself in empty, fruitless 
blossoms.” Since he is here speaking of tran- 
sient acts, he employs the aorist forms ψωμέσω 
and sapad6.—And though I dole out all 
my goods.—The verb ψωμίζειν, when used 
primarily with a personal object (Rom. xii. 20), 
means to feed as a mother does her babe, by put- 
ting into its mouth little morsels previously 
chewed; then, to feed in general, to nourish. 
When used with the accusative of the thing, it 
means to feed out, to distribute to the poor.*—And 
though I give my body that I may be 
burned.—The reading iva καυϑήσομαι is 
strongly supported--but καυϑήσωμαι 18 a barbarism, 
though found in several editions. [See Winer 
II., 313, I. e]. The burning here may be either 
a burning to death, or simple torture by fire. 
Perhaps Paul had in mind such events as are 
recorded in Dan. iii. 19 ff.; 2 Macc. vii. The 


history of his time had not yet furnished any in- 


stances of martyrdom at the stake; but in ac- 


cordance with the precedents just alluded to, and — 


through the outlook which he cast into the fu- 
ture, he might here have anticipated something 
of the sort in spirit.—It is entirely erroneous to 
suppose that the reference here is to branding, 
as that of slaves; the usual words for this are 
στίζειν and στιγματίζειν. And still less can Β΄“ 
allude to the casting of one’s self into the fire 3 
presumptuous expectation of Divine deliveran,\ 
The parallelism with the first clause naturs § 
suggests the idea of ἃ self-sacrifice for the gra 
of others. [This is the thought which Himg 
considers to be presented here]. But this te 
8 
*[Coleridge in a ΜΆ. note on this passage, given ὉΠε16- 
ley, says: The true and most significant sense is, ὁ a d 
I dole away in mouthfulls all my property, 08 ᾿ 
Who that has witnessed the alms-giving in a Cat® sym 
nastery, or the court of a Spanish or Sicilian bperjor 
archbishop’s palace, where immense revenues are abovwe 


away in farthings to herds of beggars, but mus 4 
force of the Apostle’s half satirical ψωμίσω]} © ejre 
«tue or, 


CHAP. XIII. 1-18. 


269 


--οο--Ο΄οῆ΄π::.:.ς|{ἅἀ[ἅἐῤὗὑἅ--ςς- ο΄-΄΄΄τ πῆ Ὸτ-.-ς--Ἐ-ς-᾿ ———_—_—0 00ers ww — eee ee 


not exclude the idea of a martyr-death, inasmuch 
as such a death may serve to manifest both an 
unwavering confidence in God, and also a readi- 
ness to devote one’s self, body and life, for the 
benefit of others. But if such self-devotion did 
not spring from love, it is obvious that the mar- 
tyrdom thus suffered would be only of a kind 
that often occurred later in the history of the 
church—[a mere parade of heroic endurance or 
defiance]. Thus the gloss early arose, ἵνα kav- 
χήσωμαι, in order that I may boast; which 
then would have so much the more easily come 
into the place of the more difficult, and gramma- 
tically singular καυϑήσωμαι since it would have in- 
volved the change of only oneletter. This gloss 
would also, in such a connection, be both flat 
and disturbing to the sense.—I am profited 
nothing.—Thus he takes down all conceit about 
the meritoriousness of such works. The divine 
reward, 7. e., the crown of righteousness (1 Tim. 
iv. 8), can only be given to a humble disinter- 
ested love. 

Vers. 4-7. In this paragraph we have a eulogy 
of love in a description of its qualities, setting 
forth its superior excellence both positively and 
negatively. The beauty of the description is 
heightened by a personification of love, to which 
those things are ascribed that are found in such 
as truly love. Throughout the whole there are 
occas’ onal side-glances at the faults in the Co- 
rint’ .an Church, which stood in contrast with 
th excellences set forth.— Love suffereth 

4g, and is kind ;—Here we have opposite as- 
» cts of the same quality. The former ex- 

cession denotes the withholding of anger, or 
displeasure at the offences or failings of others, 
and thus implies the overcoming of a natural in- 
dignation ; the latter denotes the exhibition of a 
mild, gracious, tender disposition. The word 
χρηστεύεται [from γρῆστος, useful] occurs 
only here in all the New Testament; and else- 
where we find it only in the Church Fathers. It 
primarily means disposed to be useful. Calvin ex- 
hibits the contrast thus—in tolerandis malis—in 
conferendis bonis. Next follows a series of state- 
ments in which several bad features are denied 
to love.—love envieth not ;—The word ζηλοῦν, 
as here used, denotes the exhibition of wrong or 
unpleasant feelings in view of advantages pos- 
sessed by others, giving rise to strife and schism; 
80 ζήλος in Rom. xiii. 13, and elsewhere.—love 
vaunteth not itself,—weprepeverac is 
onomatopoetic [‘‘and comes from the old Latin 
word perperus, a braggart.—See Polybius xxxii. 
6,5; xl. 6,2;” Sranztey]. It means fo show off 
one’s self—to cut a swell, make a display, especially 
with false pretences, to talk big, to swagger.* 
Next we have an allusion to the inward ground 
of all such conduct.—is not puffed up,—i. e., 
inflated with vanity. As this expresses the sub- 
jective state of conceit and self-exaltation, so 





*(This, however, is contrary to the meaning given by 
Chrys., and most of the Greek commentators, by all the 
older English versions, except the Geneyan, and by Schleus- 
ner, Suidas, Bloomfield, and others, who all agree in the 
sense: ‘ doth not act precipitately, frowardly, rashly, incon- 
siderately.’ Chrys. comments: “Love renders him who 
loves both considerate, and grave, and steady in his move- 
ments.”’ The balance of authority is in favor of this inter- 
pretation. Amid such disagreement it is difficult to form a 
decision]. 


does the former express the natural manifesta- 
tion of this in boasts over advantages possessed, 
and in attempts to get honor for them. [Of 
course there is acontrast here implied. hrough 
these negatives he would give them to understand 
that ‘love is modest and humble; modest be- 
cause humble.” Or as Curysostom beautifully 
says: ‘‘He adorns love not only from what she 
hath, but also from what she hath not. For he 
saith that she both brings in virtue, and extir- 
pates vice, nay, rather she suffers it not to spring 
up at all”.]—does not behave itself un- 
seemly,—The word ἀσχημονεῖν does not allude 
precisely to such conduct as is rebuked in xi. 5, 
but rather to an unseemly obtrusiveness in the 
use of gifts (comp. xiv. 27 ff.; 39). [Mxyur and 
Hopes interpret ithe word of unseemly conduct 
in general, 7. ¢., “love does nothing of which 
one ought to be ashamed; its whole deportment 
is decorous and becoming.” ]—seeketh not her 
own,—Here we have the exact opposite of the 
real nature of love, aselfish seeking after one’s 
own advantage, honor, and influence as the great 
thing to be obtained (comp. x. 24, 33).—* Love 
seeks not its own pleasure, its own enjoyment, 
its own reputation, its own advantage, its own 
freedom—yea, not its own blessedness, for, as ἃ 
general thing, it seeks nothing which it would 
have alone for itself.” Brsszur.—is not pro- 
voked to anger,—[rapoftverar; ‘the ex- 
pression is a strong one, and denotes all those 
feelings of violent irritation, and bitter exacer- 
bation, which are so easily excited in an irrita- 
ble man.” BuioomrieLp].—It points back to the 
long-suffering spoken of in ver. 4. Osiander 
distinguishes it from the former (which he ex- 
plains as shewing meekness under wrong in ge- 
neral) by the explanation ‘love does not allow 
itself to be aroused even into a transient passion, 
such as arises from the supposed infringement 
of one’s own claims and interest.’ Hence this 
declaration is closely connected with the one im- 
mediately preceding; and as much so with what 
follows.—imputeth not the evil;—oi λογί- 
ζεται τὸ κακόν; this does not refer to the evil 
which proceeds from one’s-self, as though λογί- 
ζεϑσαι meant to think upon, to meditate, as in Jer. 
xxvil. 3; Nahum i. 9; and as Luther renders it: 
“Sie trachtet nicht nach Schaden ;” but it re- 
fers only to the evil done to it, g. d., ‘love does 
not charge the evil inflicted,’ ‘does not carry it 
ever in mind, but forgives it.” (Comp. the word 
as used in Rom. iv. 8; 2 Cor. v. 19, and else- 
where). The rendering ‘suspect’ [given by 
Grot., Heyden., and adopted by Jon. Edwards in 
his celebrated discourses on this chapter] is, te 
say the least, doubtful. It is opposed by the 
article before κακόν, ‘ the evil,’ [which evidently 
implies the actual existence of some particular 
evil that was to be dealt with; so Alford, 
Hodge].—rejoiceth not at the iniquity,— 
Here, too, the thing spoken of is found outside of 
the subject, as may be seen from the positive an- 
tithetic clause which follows. [Jon. Edwards 
takes the opposite view, and understands the 
passage as affirming that love, so far from de- 
lighting in the practice of iniquity, tends to- 
wards holiness in the life. This is to overlook 
the general drift of the passage, which is rather 
to represent love in its relations to others]. But 


270 


—_ 


the iniquity to which he alludes is not iniquity 
in general—iniquity as it triumphs and spreads, 
and because it is in the ascendancy [Stanley, 
Wordsworth]; but, more suitably with the con- 
text, iniquity as perpetrated by particular indi- 
viduals, and rebounding to their own hurt [Al- 
ford]. The trait here brought out, is that disposi- 
tion to rejoice in the downfall or injury of others 
(Schadenfreude), which springs out of ill-will or 
jealousy, and which is gladdened when those who 
are enyied for their advantages are compelled 
through some mis-step to come down from their 
high position and incur disgrace. This expla- 
nation is more natural than to suppose such a 
love intended as blindly or falsely approves even 
the errors of others, applaudit male agentibus 
(Grot.); comp. Rom. i. 32; xii. 9.—As a contrast 
with this, he says,—but rejoiceth with the 
truth ;—ovyyaiper δὲ τῇ ἀληϑείᾳ, not “at 
the truth,” thus making the σὺν in composition 
only intensive [as do most of the commentators 
and the E. V., altogether overlooking the force 
of the verb and the altered construction]; nor 
as though the persons concerned were also taken 
into the account as Bengel: gratulatur [justis] 
Justitiam; but, ‘with the truth,” truth being 
_here personified. It is taken either to denote 
the absolute truth contained in the Gospel (Col. 
i. 5; 4 Thess. ii. 12, etc.) the aim of which is to 
make morality prevalent and which rejoices in 
the attainment of this end (Meyer); or in an 
ethical sense, as the good. Buraur says: “the 
truth in the fullest sense (John 111, 21; viii. 32- 
44) as the ground of true morality ;” and Nean- 
DER: ‘* Paul here traces back the idea of the 
good to that of the divine truth.” Or it is in- 
terpreted subjectively, moral good in the con- 
crete, ἡ. ¢., men who have been rescued to mo- 
rality (Rickert); or the heart filled and sancti- 
fied by the truth and by obedience to it (Osian- 
der). The ethical interpretation suits best with 
the antithesis; to that immorality, which is a vio- 
lation of the divine righteousness and the divine 
will, there 18. here contrasted the harmony of 
human life in willand act with God and His will, 
ἢ. ¢.,,truth ina moral sense. With this, where- 
ever it appears, love rejoices; it holds fellowship 
with it, and shares in the joy of its success. [So 
Hopas, who says: “the sympathy of love with 
the Gospel, therefore, does not seem to be appro- 
priate in this connection, for it is of love as a 
virtue of which Paul is speaking”’ ].—The conclu- 
sion of this description is made up of four posi- 
tive statements. The first πάντα στέγει is 
variously rendered. The verb may be construed 
either as in ix. 12, ‘‘it suffereth all things,” and 
so be referred to the pains and privations en- 
dured for the benefit of others (Burger), in dis- 
tinction from the vroyéver, endureth, that follows, 
which is referred to the trials and persecutions 
inflicted by others. Or it may be rendered 
“covers up all things,” ἡ, e., conceals and is si- 
lent about those faults of others which a malig- 
nant selfishness would gladly expose; as BenarL 
very finely says: ‘‘ hides to itself and to others.” 
So rendered it would stand in easy connection with 
the ‘rejoicing not in iniquity” of ver. 6, and 
also would suit well with what follows. [Jon. 
Edwards interprets the clause as denoting a dis- 
position which makes us willing for Christ’s 





eS ἘΞΟΟ πο απ εν ἐν το ee SS ee ee ee eee ee 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





sake to undergo all sufferings to which we may 
be exposed in the way of duty! But this, how- 
ever, truly it may be asserted of love, is hardly 
consistent with the drift of the passage. It is 
better to adhere to the strict meaning of the 
verb στέγειν, to cover, which, as used by Paul, car- 
ries with it the idea of covering over and bearing 
in silence whatever may be put upon one. So 
Stanley and Wordsworth].— believeth all 
things,—i. e., shows a trustful disposition which 
instead of suspiciously and malignantly surmis- 
ing and exposing faults, is ever inclined to sup- 
pose the existence of a good not seen, and in 
failures to presume the existence of a right inten- 
tion. —To this then is added,—hopeth all 
things.—This denotes: the disposition to hope 
for all good by looking unto God (comp. Phil. i. 
7); confidently to expect the future victory of 
good in others, whatever may be the faults and 
imperfections which for the present bar such 
hope. [Many commentators are disposed to 
widen the acceptation of these two last qualities, 
and to give them a religious significance. So 
Jon. Edwards who regards the Apostle as here 
connecting love with faith and hope, thus show- 
ing how all the graces of Christianity are con- 
nected together in mutual dependence; and ΡῈ 
WerTTE says: ‘the religious ideas, faith, hope, 
patience, are too well known not to be supposed 
to come into play here. A proper confidence in 
our neighbor passes over in many respects into 
the faith we have in the wisdom and goodness of 
God; the hope, by virtue of which we anticipate 
good in relation to our fellow-men, mounts up 
into the hope we have in the final victory of the 
kingdom of God; and the patience with which 
we endure opposition for our neighbors’ sake, 
partakes of our steadfastness in doing battle for 
the kingdom of God. The true way therefore 
will be to interpret these statements both morally 
in relation to our neighbor, and religiously in 
relation to God.” But, however true in itself, 
this expansion of thought may be, it is question- 
able whether the Apostle intended to give his 
language this scope].—From this there follows 
the ability for that which is expressed in the 
next clause,—endureth all things,—whether 
it be taken in the sense of expecting in patience, 
or of calmly enduring everything painful and 
trying that appears in the object of our hope. 
[‘‘ The verb ὑπομένειν, as Hodge says, is properly 
a military word, and means ἕο sustain the as- 
sault of an enemy. Hence it is used in the New 
Testament to express the idea of sustaining the 
assaults of suffering or persecution, in the sense 


of bearing up under them, and enduring them ~ 


patiently (2 Tim. i. 10; Heb. x. 82; xii. 2). 
This clause, therefore, differs from that at the 
beginning of the verse; as that had reference to 
annoyances and troubles [or, still better, to 
faults and offences], this to suffering and perse- 
cutions.”” Edwards, however, in consistency with 
his previous exposition interprets this clause as 
expressing the final perseverance of love, en- 
during to the end; this likewise must be consid- 
ered as transcending the Apostle’s line of thought. 
The union of faith and patience appears also in 
2 Thess. i. 8, comp. 2 Tim. ii. 25. The expression 
‘all things” is of course to be taken with a de- 
gree of allowance. In the first instance it im 








CHAP. XIII. 1-13. 


r 


plies ‘all things’ which may be endured or con- 
cealed so far as duty and conscience do not re- 
quire their exposure; in the two following it 
means ‘all things’ so far as truth allows, so that 
a person does not impose on himself, nor yield 
to groundless fancies; and in the last it is to be 
understood so as not to exclude that earnest re- 
proof which circumstances may demand, [or, 
taking the second explanation given above, so 
as not to exclude such a resistance to injury and 
wrong as the public good or the interests of 
righteousness may require]. In this way the 
whole description becomes beautifully consistent. 
Besides, in this way the first explanation of 
στέγειν, which has in its favor Pauline usage, is 
not set aside. To suppose a close connection 
here with ver. 6, is by no means necessary; the 
voluntary enduring of all possible labors and 
hardships for the good of others, in striving for 
their salvation, expressed in the first clause of 
this verse, is naturally joined with the acts ex- 
pressed in what follows. Besides, we need not 
understand by the last clause [as Hodge does] 
the endurance uf persecutions and the like, and 
can hold fast to the second of the explanations 
givenabove. Mark the climax of expressions in 
this beautiful verse. ‘Whatever love may en- 
counter from others that is calculated to make 
it impatient, all this it bears; whatever can 
make it distrustful, all this it trusts for; what- 
ever might serve to destroy hope in a neighbor, 
all this it hopes for ; whatever might cause it to 
sink in weakness, beneath all this it holds its 
ground in firmness and endurance.” MryYER.— 
After having exhibited the excellence of love by 
portraying those fundamental features of it which 
are found also in its divine Archetype (Rom. ii. 
4; 1 Tim.i. 16; 1 Pet. iii. 20; Titusiii. 4; Eph. 
li. 7) he proceeds to display its excellence still 
further by showing the permanence of those 
things in respect to which it stands preéminent. 

Vers. 8-13. The main proposition in the fol- 
lowing exposition here stands first. As to the 
original text, critics are not yet agreed as to 
whether, with the Rec., it is to be read ἐκπίπτει 
(Tisch. Ed. 7. [Words.]), or with A. B. C. [AIf., 
Stan.] πίπτει; the sense is the same,—ov καταρ- 
γεῖται, ov παύεται (comp. Luke xvi. 17). Itstates 
negatively what is positively asserted in ver. 13.— 
Love never faileth ;—The compound ἐκπίπτειν 
isapplied to denote the fading of flowers, the 
falling of trees, the dislocation of the limbs and 
the like; also displacement from one’s position, 
becoming void, in Rom. ix.6, spoken of the Word 


of God, corresponding to the Old Testament bn), 


(Job xxi. 43; xxiii.14). “There failed not aught 
of any good thing which the Lord had spoken ;” 
and similarly xxiii. 14. The simple form πίπτειν 
means (fo fall, as houses, stars and the like fall. 
Mere continuance in use is not the thing meant; 
, nor yet simply, that love never fails of its object ; 
but, actual existence. As NEANDER expresses 
it, ‘‘All manifestations of the higher life are 
transient, save love. It enduresfor ever.”—-In- 
stead of continuing in regular sequence, as might 
be expected, ‘but the gifts of various kinds 
wil! all cease,’ he introduces the mention of par- 
ticular gifts by eite—etite, whether—whether. 
By this the general idea of gifts is split into 





27\ 


its species, followed by distinct assertions re- 
specting each,—but whether (there be) pre- 
phecies,—i. 6., the gift of prophecy, in all its 
varied forms.—they shall come to nought ;— 
zi. e., When their contents are all fulfilled, when 
all that was once hidden is clearly revealed, and 
‘‘every one is taught of the Lord. (Jer. xxxi. 
34).— whether (there be) tongues, they 
shall cease ;—Not human languages as such, 
but the special gift of speaking with tongues, 
whatever it be. —whether (there be) knowl- 
edge,—the reading γνώσεις, knowledges, is not 
sufficiently accredited, and tke plural was used 
perhaps in comformit¥ with the previous word.— 
it shall come to nought.—On καταργεῖν see 
chap. i. 28. All these gifts belong to the present 
state of imperfect spiritual operations and will 
cease when the period of perfection has come. 
This he fully asserts in relation to those of 
knowledge and prophecy in ver. 9, 108. For the 
cessation of the gift of tongues such assurance 
was unnecessary, since it was evident of itself 
that this partial ecstatic and unintelligible man- 
ifestation of the Spirit was not to be regarded as 
anything perpetual and destined to continue in a 
state of perfection. [Chrys. and others, however, 
understand these futures, of the time when, faith 
having spread abroad, these special gifts will be 
no longer needed; hence, as belonging to the 
present age. And this has been the practical con- 
struction put upon them by a large portion of 
the Protestant church. Whatever may be the 
exegesis given this passage, the prevailing belief 
is that these gifts, especially those of a miracu- 
lous nature, were destined only for the apos- 
tolic period, and have already ceased. But this, 
certainly, it was not the intention of the Apostle 
to assert here. The time alluded to is undoubt- 
edly that of ‘the age to come,’ ushered in by the 
second advent of the Lord]. Since the assertion 
that these gifts were to terminate, would seem 
most strange when applied to knowledge, he pro- 
ceeds to enlarge on this first.For we know 
in part and we prophesy in part.—[Here 
we have the reason why knowledge and prophecy 
were to cease. As here exercised, they were 
partial and imperfect, and therefore in their 
present form must necessarily pass away when 
the state of perfection arrived. The most that 
the most enlightened and inspired seers of the 
present revelation could boast of, were but mo- 
mentary glimpses, whether they were into the 
mysteries of the spiritual world around them, 
or into the future beyond them].—But when 
the perfect has come, that in part shall 
come to nought.—By ‘‘the perfect” (τὸ τέλειον) 
he means the consummation of the kingdom of 
God which is to take place at the appearance of 
Christ, and not the state of believers after death. 
See Hab. ii. 14, ‘‘For the earth shall be filled 
with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as 
the waters cover thesea.” [At that time all 
partial illumination will be quenched by the su- 
perior effulgence of the divine revelation then 
made, just as the light of lamps and stars is all 
quenched by the shining of the sun].—The re- 
lation of our present defective condition to what 
it will be in this future state, is next set forth by 
an illustration furnished by comparing the sev- 
eral stages of human development — that of 


. 


272 





ignorant and inexperienced childhood with that 
of ripe manhood, which is elsewhere described 
by the epithet “perfect.” (comp. ii. 6; ii. 1; 
xiv. 20; Eph. iv. 13 ff.).—When I was a child, 
I spake as a child, I felt asa child, I 
thought as a child ;—[‘‘He here once more 
returns to himself, as the representative of man 
in general;” and the verbs employed to express 
the infant condition may be thus defined and 
distinguished. Λαλεῖν means fo use the voice, 
without any necessary reference to the word 
spoken, and is as applicable to the prattle of 
children as to the speech of men; φρονεῖν de- 
notes the internal state of the mind, heart or 
will, which expresses itself through the former, 
and means not only fo think, but also to feel or to 
be inclined in any particular direction; and Ao- 
γίζεσϑαι implies a continual process of thought, 
a course of reasoning, and means /o judge, also to 
urpose; and it may also denote behavior, so far 
as the result is established and reckoned on]. 
To refer these three acts of childhood to the 
three charisms mentioned in ver. 8, viz., of speak- 
ing with tongues of prophecy and of knowledge 
[Beng., Olsh., Stan., and others], isto say the least 
very problematical; for although the first may 
allow of this, it is hardly allowable of the other 
two, even though with Osiander we give to φρονεῖν 
a merely intellectual significance, sentire, sa- 
pere.—We might also be tempted to apply the 
condition of infancy, in its contentedness with 
its own prattle and acts and thoughts, to illus- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


——_  ) 


but it is not human knowledge in general that 18 
intended, but Christian knowledge as a gift. 
Whether this ‘‘ seeing” refers to prophetic vision 
in distinction from simple knowing, is, to say at 
least, doubtful. "Εσοπτρον some interpret to 
mean a window-pane, whether of isinglass or 
some other translucent substance. But the 
word for this is δίοπτρον, never ἔσοπτρον. The 
latter denotes a mirror which, according to the 
fashion of the time, consisted of a bright metallic 
plate, which, however, reflected dimly at the 
best. The prep. διά, ‘through’ [by which some 
support the interpretation of @ window-pane], is 
used in accordance with that optical illusion 


which makes the object reflected seem as if be-° 


hind the mirror, and so, as if seen through it.* 
The expression ἐν αἰνίγματι is not to be construed 
adverbially [as in the E. V. and by Heyden, 
Billr. and others] ‘ enigmatically,’ ‘darkly’ (auav- 
pac); but here the Apostle passes out of the 
sphere of seeing into that of hearing, and shows 
us the nature of that in which the objects alluded 
to are seen. This he callsan ‘enigma’—a word 
denoting obscure phraseology, some mode of 
statement that only hints obscurely what is 
meant, or propounds a riddle to be solved. And 
by this term he characterizes the objective me- 
dium of Christian knowledge, viz., the revealed 
word in which divine things are seen reflected 
as in a mirror. The appropriateness of the 
Gesignation is seen in the fact that the divine 
word does not convey to us these things in per- 


trate the self-sufficiency of the Corinthians in | fect clearness, but only suggests them, leaving 


the pessession and use of their gifts; so that 
then the Apostle would give us to understand in 
what follows, how everything of this sort, like- 
wise which belongs to a period of immaturity, 
must be done away in riper manhood when the 
state of perfection has come. But the course of 
thought here forbids such an application of the 
analogy, and allows only that appertaining to 
the point in view. He means to say, that as one 
who has become a man has put away the child- 
ish character in every respect, so, in the future 
age, those forms of thinking, feeling and speaking 
which belong to the present age, will give place 
to something far better. [Tne comparison here, 
it must be observed, is not as between the false 
and the true, but between the more and the less 
in regard to what is true. The thoughts and 
feelings of a child may be correct as far as they 
go, sufficient for it at its stage, but utterly in- 
adequate when compared with the objects with 
which it isconcerned: all error, if error exists, 
will be that arising from the limitation of its 
powers; and this will be gradually removed as 
its powers expand. Just so our views of divine 
things at present are not to be suspected and 
disowned as though they were false because im- 
perfect; but if formed under the guidance of the 
word and of the Spirit, they are to be relied on 
as practically sufficient for us in our present 
condition, even though destined to be greatly 
modified inthe future ].—The inadequateness of 
the present state of knowledge is more fully il- 
lustrated in ver. 12, in two contrasts—one as to 
the directness of knowledge, and the other as to 
its completeness.—For now we see through 
a mirror in an enigma;—Here knowledge is 
spoken of under the form of vision (βλέπειν) ; 


much still problematical. As MELANCTHON says: 
“The word, as it were, veils a wonderful fact 
which in the heavenly state we shall contemplate 
fully disclosed to our sight.” And Burcer: 
«¢The revealed word is called an enigma, because 
it necessarily sets forth divine truth in modes of 
expression borrowed from human conditions and 


natural phenomena—consequently in a sort ef | 


figurative language, the import of which our 
minds but partially apprehend. [And Hopes: 
«‘ We do not see the things themselves, but those 
things as set forth in symbols and words which 
but imperfectly express them.’’] Delitzsch, also, 
interprets the phrase in question of the revealed 
word. Perhapsthere was floating beforethe mind 
of the Apostle that passage in Num. xii. 8, 
where the Lord says of Moses: ‘* With him will 
I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and 
not in dark speeches (di αἰνιγμάτων, Ixx.), and 
the similitude of the Lord shall he behold.” 
Compare with this Gen. xxxii. 80: ‘I have seen 
God face to face’””—where, indeed, we have the 
expression in the antithetic clause of our text, 
which designates the immediateness of vision.— 
but, then face to face:—On this point see 1 
Jno. iti. 2: ‘We know that, when He shall 
appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall 
see Him as He is.” Essentially the same con- 
trast is expressed in 2 Cor. v.7.—now I know 
in part ;—[As before, the point of comparison 
was as to the directness of knowledge, so here it 
is as to its extent. The imperfectness of know- 
ledge is owing, however, to its indirectness].— 
but then shall I που --ἐπεγνώσομαι; 





*(But is not this an unnecessary refinement on the mean- 
ing? Instead of the localwhy not give διά the causal 
sense by means of? See ει». Gr. Gram. ᾧ 627, 3. ἀ.} 


ἢ 


CHAP. XIII. 1-13. 


“is 


nS 


the ἐπὶ in composition is intensive, shall I tho- 
roughly know, pernoscam.—even as I also was 
known.—Here, too, the same verb is employed, 
ἐπεγνώσϑην, was thoroughly known. Supply 
‘by God.’ The perfection of human knowledge 
is compared with that of the Divine knowledge 
which apprehends its object not from one side or 
the other, but is central andtotal. ‘‘ We should 
not hesitate to assert the entire fulness of the 
promise which the Holy Seripture gives to the 
soul that is related toGod. The New Testament 
occupies the proper mean between deism and 
pantheism; it never allows us to divest our- 
selves of the character peculiar to ‘personality, 
with its limitations; but, at the same time, it 
points us away to the highest exaltation of the 
human spirit by virtue of the fellowship it ac- 
quires with God. This statement of Paul cor- 
responds with the beatitude of our Lord in 
Matth. v. 8: ‘ Blessed are the pure in heart, ‘for 
they shall see God.” Neranprer. As the object 
of the verbs ‘‘see”’ and ‘‘know,” some supply 
‘God’ or ‘ Divine things,’ or ‘ God in Christ,’ but 
there is no necessity for such specification. The 
objects of vision and knowledge are obviously the 
things contained in the revealed word. The tran- 
sition from the plural to the singular number is 
occasioned by the change in the mode of exposi- 
tion. The aorist ἐπεγνώσθϑην, Iwas known, 
does no prejudice to the eternity of the Divine 
knowledge. It is employed simply to express 
the priority of that knowledge in respect to that 
of man in the future state, as a thing then past 
(Meyer, Ed. 3). It points back to the time of his 
conversion, when he became the object of the 
divine knowledge that then was turned directly 
on him (chap. viii. 8). Respecting the relation 
of this passage to others, where the ciearness and 
perfection of the Divine revelation, and of the 
Christian’s knowledge of God are prominently 
brought out, comp. Osiander, p. 601.—But what 
is the meaning of the concluding verse, and in 
what connection does it stand with the preced- 
ing?—And now—vvvi δὲ. Is this to be 
taken in its temporal acceptation as equivalent 
to the ‘‘now’”’ (ἄρτι) of the preceding verse, and 
in contrast with the “then?” * If so, to what 
extent does he emphasize the continuance ‘of the 
things specified in the present dispensation of 
the world? Does he intend to put them in con- 
trast with the other gifts which were soon to 
cease? This can hardly be, for in the Apostle’s 
view the advent of Christ was ever at hand—so 





* [So Poole, Bloomfield, and others (contrary to its use 
just after in xiv. 6), who interpret this verse as asserting the 
permanent character of the three graces in contrast with the 
transientness of the gifts, and that for this dispensation, 
while the eternal duration of love is set forth by implication 
in the last clause: “the greatest of these is love.” “The 
difficulty,” as BLOoMFIELD says, “ hinges on this: the Apostle 
has omitted to mention the cause of the superiority; yet he 
hints it in the words ‘ now abideth,’ viz., since faith and hope 
only remain in use now, in this world only, love will also be 
exercised in another world, and to al] eternity. The sense, 
then, may be thus expressed: " Faith, Hope, and Love, these 
three together exist in the present scene only; but in the 
future world Faith and Hope will be done away, and there- 
fore the greatest of these is Love.’” This interpretation 
certainly obviates some difficulties attending the other, and 
sustains the theory of the temporary nature of the gifts in 

. question; but is it not adding to the letter and import of 
Scripture something not foundthere? Andis it not opposed 

\ by the change of particles, νυνί δὲ being used instead of ἄρτι 
ip order to avoid such construction]? 


18 


ONE 


imminent, indeed, that he regards the gifts as 
continuing until then. And apart from this, in 
what goes before, he has proved that they would 
cease then from the fact that they have no place 
in a state of perfection. We are therefore com- 
pelled to take the words “ and now ” in a logical 
sense (BURGER says, ‘‘as an inference from what 
precedes ”)==‘under these circumstances,’ ὃ. 6.» 
since these gifts are appropriate only for this 
dispensation, and must cease with the incoming 
of the period of perfection.—there (therefore) 
remains permanently faith, hope, love.— 
Thus what he has said of love in ver. 8, he ex- 
tends now to the other fundamental graces of 


Christianity that are also elsewhere associated 


with love (Col. i. 4ff.; 1 Thess. 1. 8; v. 8). The 
chief objection to this construction arises from 
the fact that Paul elsewhere exhibits to us faith 
and hope as belonging to the present life in con- 
trast with the future. So in 2 Cor. v. 7, where 
‘walking by faith’ is opposed to ‘ walking by 
sight ;’ and Rom. viii. 24, where we are said to 
be “‘saved by hope,” which was hereafter to be 
merged in sight. Shall we then put the Apostle 
in contradiction with himself? Various attempts 
have been made to obviate this. Some would 
abstract from faith and hope their results or ef- 
fects, and take these simply into view as the 
things which were to remain; but this will not 
do since they must be construed in the same way 
that love is, which is here taken in a subjective 
sense. Others would construe the verb “abide” 
in other than a temporal sense, g. d., ‘so there 
is left to us these three fundamental virtues; 
these three alone have an abiding significance 
(Burger), are the essential and sufficing elements 
of the Christian life. But all such interpreta- 
tions are in this connection. arbitrary (comp. 
on ver. 8ff). Others still maintain, indeed, the 
temporal sense of the verb, but, so far as faith 
and hope are concerned, only relatively. They 
abide only until the advent. But here again the 
old difficulty arising from the gifts occurs. 
Others still interpret the verb to denote per- 


petual duration, in contrast with the practical 


and spasmodic character of the gifts; which is 
somewhat arbitrary. Others suppose a distinc- 
tion between the glorified kingdom of Christ upon 
earth and the absolute perfection of heaven, and 
refer the verb to the former state; but this can- 
not be, since the previous verses plainly point to 
a state of absolute perfection. In our exposition 
we must settle upon this, that the Apostle ascribes 
to faith and hope the same permanent character 
which he ascribes to love. But the faith he 
speaks of is not opposed to sight, (as in 2 Cor. 
still less is it the faith mentioned in verse 
2; neither is hope \o be taken in contrast wit 
actual possession and enjoyment (asin Rom.) . 
24). But faith here is the everlasting foun) 
of the state of blessedness—faith as the aise 
apprehension, and fast-holding of Ch. wrputes 
sole ground of salvation for each ane, kn oF in 
hope is the perpetual expectation of cable 478 much 
delightful manifestations of God’s y-ough un- 
expectation must also exist in th. fa Prejudice ta 
a thing impossible only under |; solic peace, it 
that God’s glory was at once | hor 1888: and un- 
and admitted of no further τ , it endures all 
stage of perfection no mor’; ὃ cho~ejoicing against 


279 274 


Ww 





developments in sight and knowledge, than does 
the maturity of manhood in the natural life. 
Such mainly is Meyer’s view. He interprets 
faith as an abiding trust in the atonement ef- 
fected by Christ, which preserves the glorified 
in the perpetual enjoyment of salvation, and 
forms the living bond of an eternal fellowship 
with their Saviour; and hope he explains of the 
eternal duration, and progressive unfolding of 
the glory conferred upon them; and also from 
chap. xv. 24 he seems to find such developments 
in the future state indicated. And NEANDER says, 
‘precisely because faith anticipates a higher 
stage of development in life, is it certain that 
that which it now has only as an object of faith 
is not to be had as a perfect possession of know- 
ledge.”” Somewhat different is Menken’s view ; 
he assumes the eternal duration of both faith and 
hope in relation to ever fresh revelations of God, 
and to ever new degrees of blessedness also in 
the higher state. Accordingly we need not, with 
Osiander, refer back simply to the general state 
of mind underlying both: υἱΖ., that ofa true and 
blessed attachment to God in Christ, which is to 
zo on unfolding itself even in yonder world.— 
these three; but the greater of these.— 
μείζων τούτων; τουτῶων, of these, is commonly 
referred to faith and hope, so that it is trans- 
lated ‘greater than these.’ But the nearer re- 
ference is to the words ‘‘ these three,” and the 
proper rendering isas above. Of them all the 
greater, the one possessing higher worth —is 
love.—From the fact that love has nothing to do 
with the justification of the sinner, and that here 
faith alone comes into the account, no inference 
can be drawn in respect to the relative worth of 
faith; hence also the inquiry which Calvin insti- 
tutes in respect to how far, also, on the other 
hand, faith is greater than love, is here super- 
fluous. The superior worth of love, which is 
the sum and substance of all virtues, and is the 
bond of perfectness (ver. 4ff.; Col. iii. 14), does 
not rest on the fact that it includes in itself faith 
and hope, as one would infer from ver. 7 [as pr 
Werte, who beautifully remarks, ‘‘ we have faith 
only in one whom we love, we hope only for that 
which we love”’]; but rather on this, that in it 
the image of God, who is love itself, is most per- 
fectly exhibited, in so far as, unlike the other 
two, it does not relate to the receiving of our sal- 
vation with all its blessings, but is essentially 
imparting and self-bestowment. It is to this that 
BenGet finely points: ‘‘ Love is of more advan- 
tage to our neighbor, than mere faith and hope 
in themselves (comp. ‘‘greater,” xiv. 5);—and 


poy God is not called faith or hope absolutely, but 


its pde is called ‘love; 


>»? 


and Meyer in Ed. 8 says: 


things ‘ince, in relation to faith, the love by which it 
disowneas conditions its moral worth as well as the 
perfect; b.fruitfulness of the Christian life, faith 
word and ot it would be mere show; and hope can 
as practicallyy froma faith that is active and loving 
condition, eventh. xxy. 86). And Buragr: ‘“ Love 
modified in the fu because it is the fundamental form 
the present state dife itself, which, in us, should be 
lustrated in ver. 12, ways of faith, and of hope.” 
the directness of knovThroughout this chapter the 
its completeness.—Fo!ce of one gift to others is 


a mirror in an enigm: superior usefulness. 


This 


spoken of under the fornd judged by this rule, love 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





is greater than either faith or hope. Faith saves 
ourselves, but love benefits others ”’]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Love the essential principle of all moral excel- 
lence. The personal worth and eternal welfare 
of an individual consists not in any thing which 
he may have or be capable of, whether it be 
called talent, or endowment, or aptitude, or ca- 


pacity, which may enable him to accomplish any ~ 


thing of greater or less importance in any sphere 
of life, in the way either of thought or know- 
ledge, of willing or working. In this matter it 
makes no difference even though the person may 
act as an organ of the Spirit of God, who for the 
time being may take possession of his natural 
powers and employ them upon Divine things, 
Let him do, or say, or think, what he will under 
such circumstances, from this alone no personal 
worth, no true salvation ensues. This rests 
solely and alone in an actual likeness to God as 
evinced in the whole tendency of a person’s life, 
And this likeness is found in love, by means of 
which a man patterns after God in his whole in- 
ner and outward conduct, becomes fundamén- 
tally united with God, thinks and acts like God, 
and purposes to have and to hold nothing good 
for himself alone, but to impart it to others 
also, gives up all exclusiveness, and devotes 
himself with his utmost energies to works of be- 
nevolence, seeking therein not his own adyan- 
tage, nor honor, nor influence, but his neigh- 
bor’s good, and so also the fulfilment of the Di- 
vine ends, even the glory of God. So long, then, 
as Christ, who is the revelation of the Father’s 
love, is formed ina man, does he possess a 
worth which nothing else can confer; and in 
company with Christ is he admitted into the 
very fulness of the Divine blessings, to share in 
Christ’s salvation and enter on a life of everlast- 
ing blessedness. Has he any particular qualifi- 
cations, with these he serves the body of Christ, 
and devotes himself and all he has to promote 
the welfare of that heavenly communion into 
which he is incorporated. Thus does he become 
a veritable member of this holy and blessed so- 
ciety, and participates in the Divine fulness 
which fills it. 

But he that is devoid of love, however great 
his gifts, however superior his knowledge or his 
performances, is in consequence void of worth. 
The Spirit of Christ is not the life of his life—not 
the vital bond of his union with God—not the 
power which possesses his heart and draws it 
out from its selfish isolation and sheds abroad in 
him that love by means of which he in the very 
image and frame of his mind shall be conformed 
to the Divine image. In acting upon him the 
Spirit of God operates from without, and em- 
ploys his particular powers only as the instru- 
ments for the accomplishment of specific objects, 
and only so long as it may please Him. Re. 
maining fast in his own selfishness, and be- 
coming an end to himself apart from God, he for 
this reason forfeits all claim to regard, and de- 
serves to be used only as a means by that Being 
whose honor he has thus violated. All the re- 
ward he has is in the pleasure and reputation he 
may have acquired by his gifts; and shut up ir 


CHAP. XIII. 1-13. 276 


e 





himself he lives and moves untouched by that 
stream of Divine blessing which flows in upon 
and fills the body of Christ, and makes every 
member rich to his profoundest contentment 
through the interchange of benefits which goes 
on between the members. The same holds true 
also in relation to such actions as are supposed 
to betoken a stronger love, viz., extraordinary 
sacrifices, both of property and of life itself, and 
that too amid martyr sufferings. Should these 
be made in a loveless temper, and in a selfish 
spirit, though never so refined, they secure no 
advantage. The person forfeits his crown, be- 
cause instead of honoring God he sought only to 
glorify himself. 

2. The excellent quality of love. That which 
thus conditions our personal worth and salvation 
must in itself be supremely excellent. Accord- 
ingly we see that love displays itself in a nobler 
array of glorious attributes which are but the 
outgoings of its inmost nature. Indeed, its 
beauty is seen not only in what it has, but also 
in what it is devoid of. If with disinterested af- 
fection I devote myself to my brother’s highest 
welfare, then will there be no room in my heart 
for spite or zl-will, and no relaxation in my labors 
and prayers in his behalf. Even though his 
progress be slower than 1 anticipated, though he 
exhibits all manner of weakness and imperfec- 
tion, though he fails and backslides again and 
again, though he evinces an unteachable or 
ungrateful disposition, though he causes me 
weariness and disgust, though he grieves and 
provokes me, though he betrays my confidence 
and disappoints my hcpe often, yet for all this 
will I not turn from him in indignation. Love 
teaches me to endure, and to restrain my impa- 
tience, and to cherish and manifest my benevo- 
lence still, according to the example of my God. 
It prompts me to go on and bear all things, and 
endure labors and crosses in His behalf, on the 
ready supposition that where God’s work has he- 
gup, however concealed from me, some good 
must exist which calls for my persevering effort 
even when the danger of failure seems most im- 
minent. Again, if in cordial love I have given 
myself up to the communion of saints in Christ, 
then I shall feel neither envy nor jealousy in view 
of the preéminent gifts, or greater influence, 
or higher honor of others.—So, too, I shall be ex- 
empt from pride and boasting on account of my 
own superior advantages: nor will IL unbe- 
comingly obtrude myself on others’ notice; but 
every where maintain a modest and decorous 
deportment; neither shall I be seeking mine 
own honor, or power, or enjoyment, nor give 
place to bitterness and evil passion when disap- 
pointed in such attempts or baffled by rivals. 
Moving continually in the sphere of that grace 
which freely and abundantly pardons all sin, I 
too shall not be ready to impute the injustice I 
suffer from, but rather shall seek to aid and 
bless in return, and requite good for evil. 
Moreover, having been made free by the truth 
myself, I shall sympathize with truth in every 
victory it gains, and take no» pleasure in une 
righteousness, nor feel a malignant satisfaction 

vhen others fall, as though their fall redounded 
a some way to my credit. Thus is love su- 
remely beautiful, both from what it lacks and 


from what it possesses, shining forth in contrast 
with the sins and imperfections of the world, 
like a visitant from heaven. 

8. Faith, Hope and Love alone permanent. Par- 
ticular gifts which afford us only transient 
glimpses into the depths of the Divine plans and 
purposes, serve well for the wants of the present 
life, and satisfy certain needs of the church 
during its earthly career; but for this reason 
they are not suited to that state of perfection 
where the partial gives place to the complete, and 
where, instead of a knowledge mediated by inade- 
quate words and signs, we enjoy the direct vision 
of God and of all things in Him. That only can 
endure which may be regarded as a conclusive 
union of our renewed nature with the life of 
God—with eternal grace, and truth, and glory. 
And such is faith which firmly and trustfully 
clings to God’s redeeming grace in Christ as the 
sole foundation of safety both for time and eter- 
nity; such is hope, which reaches out joyfully 
after ever fresh manifestations of the Divine 
glory ; such, too, is Jove, the union of the regene- 
rate soul with the Triune God, in which the very 
life of God gushes forth in inexhaustible streams, 
and which must have the preéminence, even as 
the Divine principle of distribution and self-be- 
stowment must have the superiority over the 
earthly principle of receiving and enjoying, be- 
cause ‘‘it is more blessed to give than to re- 
ceive.” 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Curys.:—Ver. 5. Asaspark which falls intothe 
sea hurts not the sea, but is itself extinguished, 
so let any thing evil befall the loving soul, and 
it will soon be extinguished without disquietude. 

LuTHER: — Ver. 8. Giving is indeed a fruit 
of love, but it is not love itself: love is a 
spiritual gift which involves the heart and not 
the hand alone; love denotes not that which the 
hand does, but which the heart feels.—Ver. 5. 
‘Not to seek itsown ;’ behold, this is the nature 
of love where it is sincere; but it is sincere 
only where faith is sincere. A Christian lives 
not in himself alone, but in Christ and-in his 
neighbor—in Christ, through faith; in his neigh- 
bor through love. Through faith he passes be- 
yond himself into God, and out of God he passes 
again below himself through love, and: ever 
abides in God and in Divine love. 

StarKe:—Ver. 1. Glorious gifts make no man 
a Christian, but it is love that makes and proves 
him such (Gal. v. 6; John xiii. 85).—What is 
the knowledge contained in that speech which is 
not used through love and unto love, but the 
confusion of Babel. Oftentimes there is great 
sounding in the ear when there is no profit be- “ 
fore God. Many a man speaks to his neighbor { 
in pure angelic words, while his heart is devo” 0 
of love; and to God he daily draws near wiPUles 
his heart is far from him.—Ver. 2. The kn‘ OF 2 
edge of divine mysteries is a remarkable "78 much 
but take away love and it loses its pr-0Ugh un- 
wonder-working faith is not the fa®reJudice te 
makes blessed. Though possessing 9119 peace, it 
yet be plunged into the prison-hor228;_ and un- 
lieving souls (Matt. vii. 224f.). ὀ ὠ.1Ὁ endures all 

Hep. :—Ver. 3. Letno one be cha~@cing against 


270 





ing and suffering. Inquire after the disposition— 
the groundandtheaim. Love gives weight to all.— 
Though Ido allthe gooda man can, and suffer all a 
man may ; without love itis no good work for which 
I can hope a gracious reward.—To hazard life 
rather than the truth is indeed in itself some- 
thing commendable; but he who might on this 
account endure the severest martyrdom without 
love, would nevertheless derive therefrom no 
profit.—There are true and false martyrs—God’s 
and the devil’s.—Vv. 4-7. As in a crown there 
are many precious stones, so in the single virtue 
of love there are imbedded many virtues. But 
to no wickedness must love be so hostile as to 
wrath and revenge, which it encounters in the 
beginning (‘“‘long suffering’’), middle (‘is not 
easily provoked” ), and end (‘‘ endures” ).—Whom 
we love, we highly esteem; how then can we ex- 
alt ourselves above him?—O, how sadly is the 
sweet name of love abused in that it is made to 
serve as a veil for all unchastity and wanton- 
ness (ἀσχημονεῖν) !—Love is so far from making 
unrighteous demands that it rather yields its 
rights and imparts itself, with all ithas and can, 
unto others. That which is called love and 
friendship is oftentimes nothing but a trade— 
with one hand it gives, but with both hands it is 
ready to take again. Behold how rare true love 
has become (x. 24).—Love does not ‘laugh in the 
sleeve’ when it sees a neighbor fall into sin; 
rather, it rejoices when men act uprightly and 
it goes well with them.—Void of love are they, 
who for the sake of peace in the church would 
readily seil the truth of the gospel. This is far 
too precious a jewel to be thus bartered.—Be- 
cause love wishes all good to every one, it can 
surmise evil of none, but ever hopes well of a 
neighbor. Although often deceived in its good 
opinion, yet does it fill out the measure of its 
goodness by enduring everything, and labors 
still to set him right with all mildness and meek- 
ness. It does not readily despair of any sinier, 
however bad, and keeps hoping that God will still 
preserve him, and that he will yet acknowledge 
and reform from his unrighteousness.—Love has 
a broad mantle which it spreads over a multi- 
tude of sins and guards itself from the curse of 
Ham with all diligence.—Ver. 8 ff.: Love pro- 
duces its fruits here without intermission and is 
a foretaste of eternal life ; yonder it will become 
perfect ; and in this our blessedness will consist. 
Although we possess everything in faith, and do 
now perceive something of what God is, and 
what He gives us, yet is this knowledge scant 
when compared with the clear vision of the fu- 
ture. Here we have only a few drops out of an 
ocean of divine knowledge; and who does not 
Often find in these very drops an abyss which he 
thi. cannot fathom (Rom. xi. 33)?—The imperfeet 
150 Knowledge is as far surpassed by the perfect as 
spaeip wax light is by the sunshine (Hed.).—If thy 
wore’ “owledge is but patchwork, why dost thou boast 
ΒΒ ρα δὶ Heaven is the school where we shall 
τον ecome masters.—Even prophecy, although 
mer uC “te erfection of an enlightened mind, is yet 
the i, ἫΡ *“ inasmuch ag it does not behold the 
ee V©- blessing as present, but only contem- 
the joc ab Οἱ τη afar. This will cease when we 
ts completeness.-.1. chief object of all prophecy ful- 


a mirror in ane } 
τ redemption.—B ur 
spoken of under tu P y reason of o 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





childish apprehension even the otherwise clear 
word of God comes to us as aveiled speech in 
which we ever look with industrious contempla- 
tion and only gradually discover the import; but 
in that perfect state we shall have God and all 
heavenly things present to our view and behold 
them as they are.—Ver. 13: Faith receives good, 
love does good. Faith and hope profit me only, — 
but love serves many. It alone of the three is an 
attribute of God, and in men it is the most dis- 
tinguished feature of the divine image.—Faith is 
the ground of a holy life and of good works; 
hope builds the edifice of the same; and love 
perfects and crowns it. 

Bervens. BrpeL:—Ver. 1. Itis better to appear 
foolish and weak before men, than to speak with- 
out the spirit of Christ; better to lack speech, 
than to lack love.—Ver. 2. In comparison with 
love everything is small, even the miracles of a 
wonder-working faith. Wherefore? Because 
our nature arrogates to itself all these works. 
But love ever bows low before the object loved, 
both God and man, and so is secured against all 
temptations to this.—As even the most plausible 
words are dead without love, so without love the 
best knowledge is also unfruitful; yea, it serves 
to enhance man’s condemnation. Without it the 
glorious gift of prophecy especially is nothing, 
since God designs to be praised only in the Son 
of His love; and without love no words, however 
excellent, do Him service. The love of God, as 
it is His very nature and life, we may well 
call the mystery of mysteries. For who can 
rightly compute its power, attributes, and opera- 
tions? Hence the knowledge of all mysteries 
and all other science, otherwise never so good, 
is cheap in comparison with it.—With all your 
spiritual gifts, always consider how far the one 
divine power of love may yet be wanting in thee 
for softening all your wild natural enthusiasm. 
Love makes the heart true and obedient. The 
greatest works may be performed from false mo- 
tives, or even may be perverted to our own self- 
seeking.—Ver. 8. Love surpasses all sacrifice. 
A person can still love himself in the highest 
degree, be seeking his own honor, and the praise 
of men, even when dividing all his property 
among the poor, or complying with other reli- 
gious requirements only for the purpose of being 
praised as a zealous Christian. So out of self- ᾿ 
love may a person fling away his life, and suffer 
martyrdom, only that he may gain an immortal 
name. Such, indeed, have their reward.—But 
what boots it for them to cast away all their 
goods, if they do not also cast away their self- 
will? All formal sacrifice profits nothing, be- 
cause it is without the true love of God, which 
indeed admits of no such self-love; and by it 
one becomes worse instead of better. Love is 
the disposition of God; as common the word, so 
uncommon is the thing itself. Set over against 
it the most extraordinary things are overtopped, 
and seem undesirable. From this we may infer 
the greatness of love, and how much it is to be 
preferred against all else. But, O Love, man 
knoweth thee not,-because thou art hid behind 
thine own simplicity. Only by thy workings 
canst thou be recognized,—Ver. 4 ff. Love is in- 
vincible. By impatience the strongest and the 
wisest, when devoid of love, may be overcome 


CHAP. ΧΙ. 1-13. 





of evil; but love is able to endure the keenest 
sufferings, and it is this that makes it strong. It 
shows itself, therefore, in those who have Jesus 
dwelling in them, partly by the manifestation of 
good, and partly by the endurance of evil, and 
in both meekness and long-suffering as exhibited 
in the heart and life of Jesus.—Ver. 4. By viriue 
of its soft, gentle nature, which shuns all rash- 
ness and haste, love is in itself long-suffering, 
even as God Himself is (Rom. ix. 22), especially 
in its dealing with difficult cases in the church; 
not that we are to let all evil pass, but only not 
to overdrive reform. Love is kind (Gal. viii. 22) ; 
this is its nature. The love of God, infused at 
the new birth, makes the soul kind, so that it 
gladly affords others the means of enjoyment 
also. It says not: ‘‘I am not bound to do this and 
this;” but where there is no law it makes one, in 
order to do as much good as it can, and to pour 
itself freely upon all men.—With love envy, re- 
venge, wickedness, and pride can find no room. 
Love feels no jealousy in seeing another achiey- 
ing great things.—Its whole action is modest. 
Its tender spirit allows of no arrogance. It 
boasts not of its divine nature, since its disposi- 
tion is only to serve. It makes itself small and 
child-like; it bows its temper to a low estimate 
of itself, and a high estimate of others. It aims 
not at the praise of men, nor at self-pleasing; 
but strives, in every way, to please God, and all 
who are loved of God.—Ver. 5. According to a 
common proverb, the final end of love, in which 
it rests and is content, is the satisfaction and 
pleasure of the object beloved. True love has 
no separate interest of its own, but it gives itself 
entirely, with all its being and means, to its ob- 
ject. His good is its good, his joy its joy; it 
lives solely and alone in him and for him. If it 
knows that it has occasioned him any displeasure, 
then is its allembittered; and it cannot rest until 
it is assured that he has become reconciled again. 
Love allows itself in no violence, nor any inordi- 
nate desires after anything, nor in any ill humor 
even against evil.—It can forget; has no memory 
for evil; strikes it out of mind.—Ver. 6. Love 
. takes no delight in seeing a person stumbling, 
so that it can raise a hue and cry after him. 
Antichristian spirits rejoice when anything goes 
wrong with those who do not codperate with 
them in all things. Love is righteous, and re- 
joices when the spirit obtains a conquest over 
wickedness.—The love which does not rejoice in 
the truth, is no love.—Ver. 7. Love is not credu- 
lous, but believes all good of another sooner than 
allow itself easily to believe, or to imagine any- 
thing wicked, because love ever inclines to the 
side of the good. Love trusts God for final vic- 
tory inall things. What it does not see, it awaits 
in patience; it exercises itself in prayer, and 
does not soon become weary of fidelity and pa- 
tience towards cthers, but quietly endures the 
sufferings meted out unto it.—As in good, so in 
evil, is it invincikle. It would rather bear, be- 
lieve, hope, suffer all things than allow evil to 
triumph. Away, therefore, with your passion- 
ate, false, wrathful natures!—O Thou eternal 
Life, in the midst of Thine enemies rule Thou in 
us, through Thy larib-like loving Spirit, in the 


277 





ending and ceaseless as God’s own eternal life, 
even so far as He imparts it to His believing 
creatures. It continues in eternity as an eternal 
essence and life in God, and in all blessed spi- 
rits. Other spiritual gifts are indeed from God, 
but they are not God’s essence and life as love is, 
and they retire before it in eternity.—All other 
gifts are only preparations for perfect love; in 
it all those things terminate which have not in 
themselves the entire divine life. — Vv. 9, 10, 
One knows this, another that, none everything. 
The Church of God anticipates a summer which 
shall never pass away. At last the tree produces 
ripe fruits, the child loses himself in the youth, 
and the youthinthe man. When the veils which 
now curtain us are all taken away, then will the 
perfect come. To abide in that which is frag- 
mentary when age is matured, is childishness. 
When we hold to special gifts for their own sake 
alone, then are we liable to become extinguished 
with them.—Ver. 11 f. Mature manhood in Christ 
exchanges the patchwork of the outward exer- 
cises in speech and knowledge for the perfect 
essence of love. This makes us Christ godly- 
minded, and glorifies in us Christ, in the Father. 
—Ver. 13. Faith, hope, and charity, all three, 
are the simple cleaving of the loftiest disposition 
to God, as that Being who alone can and will 
help us through Himself. In love we have joy 
in Him as the highest good which can satisfy all 
our longings, and we strive to please Him su- 
premely. In faith we commit ourselves wholly 
to Him on the ground that He loves us, and con- 
sequently will help us. In hope we patiently 
expect that He will love us in eternity, will im- 
part Himself to us, and be our help forever. 
RieGeR :—Vy. 1-3. That a person may have 
gifts without communion with God is a witness 
of the general disposition on the part of God 
to do good and simply to give. If a man en- 
dowed with many gifts is nothing without love, 
what must that man be who is utterly estranged 
from the life of love, and has nothing at all 
wherewith to clothe his nakedness. As long 
suffering, love can consume much time over the 
failings of others; as kind, it considers how it 
can make itself acceptable to them for their im- 
provement. It desires not tobe and todo every- 
thing itself; but it looks gladly on when its de- 
fects are supplied by the assistance and gifts of 
others. Together with this, it avoids all that 
petulance which characterizes those who love to 
please themselves. It is not puffed up with the 
breath of human applause, and in all it does, has 
reference rather to the Father who seeth in 
secret. Hence, it never behaves itself rudely, 
neither by making too common of high things, 
or by being too free with equals or by looking 
contemptuously on what is low; but it keeps in 
the place where God has put it asa member. It 
neither seeks its own in selfishness, nor fails to 
prefer the general good to its own. It imputes 
not evil, holding others aloof in suspicion or in 
revenge. It helps the truth, and it suffers much 
that is unjust towards it to pass as though un- 
observed. As far as it can, without prejudice te 
others and without injury to the public peace, it 
believes all things and hopes all things; and un- 


patience and faith _. Thy saints, in mildness and | til this hope has become a joy, it endures all 
meekness, and ti wnquility!—Ver. 8. Love is un- | things and holds fast;—mercy rejoicing against 


278 





judgment.—Vv. 8-12. All knowledge and pro- 
phecy is patchwork; these can represent the 
truth only in partial aspects without giving a 
complete survey, because God has determined 
to draw men to Himself through His word, and 
the gradual revelation of Himself therein, and to 
operate upon their hearts under these external 
presentations, according as men allow them- 
selves to be brought thereby to the obedience of 
faith and to heed the partial revelations given. 
After the light that was quenched in the fall, 
God purposed to restore man not through a di- 
rect illumination that would have rendered faith 
and conviction, obedience and love unnecessary. 
As he sinned through hearing and through diso- 
bedience, so was he to be saved also by hearing 
and faith and obedience. Therefore Godshowed 
to him so much as was necessary to awaken 
faith and obedience, left it so far obscure as to 
allow room for the excuses of unbelief in case he 
ceased to have pleasure in the truth.—All of us 
are too ready to engross to ourselves everything 
with the desire of becoming perfect ourselves; 
but the Scriptures admonish us to hold every- 
thing as a common good which has been con- 
ferred on us and others. The perfect descends 
upon me—even the kingdom of God, into which 
I enter, and which brings with itself something 
far beyond that which 1 could hitherto attain 
unto with my partial knowledge in prophesying. 
Ver. 13. Among the perfected righteous, love 
will remain as the bond of perfection. He 
who abides in love abides in God, and God in 
him. 

Hevsner:—Ver. 1. Love alone has uncondi- 
tioned worth, it carries in itself its own contents; 
everything else, even the highest spiritual ad- 
vantages obtain their worth through it. All 
speech without it is lifeless. The most beauti- 
ful orator devoid of heart is but a beautiful in- 
strument unconscious of what is played on it. 
The simplest words spoken in love are of more 
worth than the most charming speeches void of 
heart. Those who are eminent for insight 
should not forget to love. And to whom this in- 
sight is denied, let him not trouble himself if he 
has love.—Indeed, there is a service which offers 
up all things and endures all sufferings and yet 
obtains not the grace of God nor any eternal re- 
ward, because love is wanting—because the thing 
was done for love of fame.—Ver. 4ff. As the 
worth of love shines forth by a comparison with 
other excellencies, so isit seen also from its blessed 
fruits. Its chief attributes are a sparing tender- 
ness, a gentleness which never injures, a sim- 
ple self-forgetfulness, holy sympathy, invincible 
courage,—Division: I. according to the subject: 
benevolent (ver. 4), true (ver. 5), holy (ver. 6), in- 
vincible (ver.7); II. according to its objects: the 
failures, infirmities, follies of others (ver. 4), inju- 
ries (ver. 5), needs (ver.6).—Ver. 4. Loveis nota 
transient ebullition, but a benevolence which does 
not allow itself to slumber, or kindle into wrath 
on account of the failings or indocility of others, 
It so associates with others that they can ob- 
serve and feel the inner affection in its friendly 
ways.—It does not deal petulantly with the 
weaknesses and follies of others, nor make them 
the subject of ridicule.—It is free from conceit 
and self-consciousness, and is willing to let 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





others feei its own weakness.—Ver. 5. Amid 
injuries it does not break out into wrath and 
contemptuous expressions, nor does it allow it- 
self in anything by which another’s sensitiveness 
or feeling of shame can be wounded, nor is it 
unseemingly obtrusive. It asks not, ““ what is 
that to me?” nor disavows the natural relationship 
among men, nor measures the iniquities of 
others according to the damage suffered. — It 
does not allow its benevolence to be disturbed 
by the pains which others inflict upon it. It 
hunts not after evil to insist onan atonement, but 
cherishes thoughts of peace.—Ver. 6. Observe 
its holy interest in the spiritual welfare of others: 
while the evil-minded rejoice over other’s sins 
and punishments and disgrace, and narrate 
them with laughing lips, love delights in be- 
holding the sincere piety of others clearly dis- 
played.—Ver. 7. Love dces not secretly impose 
severe labors upon others, but performs them 
itself, and bears their brunt.—It gives the best 
credit possible to others for their doings and 
hopes always for their improvement, and under- 
takes to promote it in all possible ways.—Ver. 8 
ff. The worth of love is seen thirdly, from its 
eternal duration, It alone avails in Heaven 
where all that is here learned is useless.—In 
Heaven there is no preaching, since only one 
spiritual tongue is there spoken. We shall read 
each other’s thoughts in our souls. The highest 
human knowledge isin its extent and depth and 
connections but mere patchwork.—Now God has 
given us a problem to solve; we are to find 
its solution in nature, in History, in His word 
where His holy love exhibits itself to us in the 
image of Christ. Then shall we behold that 
which is now unseen, face to face. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 1. As the life blood of 
the body is poured from the heart into all the 
members, and as every heart-beat pulsates in all 
the veins, so is love the heart of the body of 
Christ. God has love without measure. His 
essence is love. The Christian has only drops 
from this divine sea of love, some small portion 
of the divine fulness. And Paul is strenuous that 
the love of the Spirit which renews the human 
soul in Christ, shall move the tongue of him 
who prays and sings praises; that love to the 
Lord Jesus, love to the church, love to all man- 
kind shall give to the sounding instrument its 
living tune.—Ver. 3. Ὁ, howmany works of un- 
‘dying fame perish before God and follow not 
their authors, because they are not quickened by 
that love which is alone imperishable !—Vy. 
4.1. The twice-seven graces of love here shine 
like the seven colors of the rainbow. The rain- 
bow is the token of the triumph of the sun over 
the rain; so love shows itself triumphant over all 
hostile obstructions in manifold ways. The 
heavenly daughter of the Spirit triumphs over 
that which is carnal and earthly.—The varnish 
of a worldly polish is nothing in comparison 
with the culture of the heart in the Christian, 
however humble his condition may be; love 
ennobles the whole conduct of him who has it.— 
O, Thou true Savior, in our poverty we cry to 
Thee! Turn Thyself to us' From being wrath- 
ful, unfriendly, envious, ‘haughty, conceited, 
rude, selfish, implacable, revengeful, cold tem- 
pered, unmerciful, suspicious, mean, impatient 


δ nee ie 


CHAP. XIV. 





do Thou make us loving in heart.—Vy. 9-10. 
The edifice of evangelical doctrine has many 
openings which will remain unclosed, for they 
are the windows out of which we look toward 
Heaven and for the coming of that which is per- 
fect.—Ver. 13. The Christian life is subject to 
the triumvirate of the three here lauded (comp. 
1 Thess. i. ὃ; Col. i. 4,5; Heb. x. 22-24).— 
Faith lays hold of the promise of eternal life ; 
hope waits for the appearing of the object of 
faith ; but dove is eternal life itself in its power 
as manifested towardGod and man. Itis greater 
in duration; its being has no end. 

Ewatp :—Vv. 4-7. Zhe worth of love. There 
is not a Christian virtue which is not strength- 
ened by its power, not an evil which it cannot 
keep aloof, not a condition in life to which it 
cannot impart a Christian character. 

Vv. 1-13. Pericope for Esto Mihi Sunday, 
OxrtincER, Sermons on the Epistles Ὁ. 161 ff.—I. 
True love distinguished from attachment and par- 
tiality; II. overcometh all wrath and judgment, 

Hevspyer.—l. Love is the highest gift of grace, 
on account of: 1. its inward worth ; 2. its blessing, 
and 3. its influence upon eternal life. II. Loveis 
the consummation of Christianity: 1. it puts the 
crown upon all excellencies; 2. it exhibits pre- 
eminently the power of Christian faith; 3. it 
sets us in connection with eternity and God. 
III. The comparison between the excellencies of 
the mind and of the heart: 1. the former have 
in themselves no unconditioned worth; without 
love they may inflict injury; the latter alone 
impart worth, and united with it the former be- 
come truly renowned; 2. the former do not 
make a person beneficial to the public; love 
only makes one ready to serve and generally 
useful; 3. the former confer no claim for salva- 
tion; love alone makes us worthy of heaven. 
IV. TheChristian road to true fame (comp. chap. 
xii. 81): 1. It is a holy road, different from the 
ordinary one; 2. it is a truly difficult road, re- 
quiring much labor (comp. vv. 4-7), often not 
remunerative, often losing itself in the dark ; 
but yet 8. it is safe, and certain of leading to 
heaven. V. The worth of true love: 1. often 
eclipsed by glittering gifts and showy acts; 2. 
its peculiar spirit, being often occupied in un- 
seen labors, is not visible; 8. its eternalreward 
still hidden.—Vv. 1-8. Sermons by J. G. KRarFrt. 
Vol. 1, p. 165ff. Love: I. Its peculiar -char- 


279 





acter: 1. as to its ground (humility); 2. as to 
attributes. II. Its higher worth: it sanctifieg 
knowledge; is the soul of faith; is the conse- 
cration of every good deed. III. How we 
shall partake of the same: 1. by the contempla- 
tion of its archetype in Jesus Christ; 2. by re- 
ceiving love from Him who is the fountain of 
grace and love.. 

Ver. 7. SCHLEIERMACHER’S Collected works. Vol. 
I. p. 40. The limits of forbearance: I. in our 
judgment respecting men; II. in our behavior 
toward them. “It is only justice toward the 
good and the pious, when you look upon them 
with the eyes of love, all glowing with faith and 
hope; it is only love to the evil, when you show 
strict justice towards the evil which is in them.” 

[Jon. Epwarps. Charity and its fruits. Vv. 
1-3. All the virtue that is saving and distinguist es 
true Christians from others, is summed up in 
Christian Love. I. The nature of this love: 1. in 
all true Christians is one and the same in prin- 
ciple; a. from the same spirit; b. wrought by 
the same work; c. has the same motives. II. 
Proof that all true virtue is summed up in it: 
1. from what reason teaches of its nature: a. 
that it disposes to all proper acts of respect to- 
wards God and men; b. that whatever seeming 
virtues there are without love are unsound and 
hypocritical ; 2. from what Scripture teaches: 
a. of the law and word of God in general, 
b. and of each table of the law in par- 
ticular; 8. from what the apostle asserts of 
faith that ‘it works by love:” a. love is the 
most essential and distinguishing ingredient in 
a true and living faith; b. all Christian ex- 
ercises of the heart and works of love are 
from love. Application: 1. by way of self- 
examination; 2. by way of instruction. a. It 
shows us what is the right Christian spirit. 
b. Professors of Christianity may be taught as 
to their experiences whether they be real Chris- 
tian experiences or not. c. It shows the amia- 
bleness of the Christian spirit; d. also the plea- 
santness of a Christian life; e. the reason why 
contention is so destructive to religion; f. hence 
the need of watchfulness against envy and malice 
and all like passions; g. hence no wonder we 
are commanded to love our enemies; h. we learn 
the importance of seeking a spirit of love, and 
of growing in it more and more. ] 


3. A conivarison of the gifts of prophecy and of speaking with tongues, in respect 
to thair worth for the edification of the Church. Rules forthe right regulation 
of the. use according to their end, and according to the benefit they render 


to the Uhurch. 


CHapTerR XIV. 


Forzow after charity [love, τὴν ἀγάπην], and [but, 62] desire [the, ra] spiritual 
2 gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue 


΄ 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





[a tongue] speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [hear- 


3 eth, ἀχούει7 him; howbeit in the spirit [Spirit] he speaketh mysteries. But he that 


+ 
5 


6 


18 
19 


20 


21 


prophesieth speaketh unto men to [om. to] edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue [a tongue] edifieth himself; but he that pro- 
phesieth edifieth the church (congregation, ἐχχλησίαν]. I would that ye all spake 
[Now I wish you all to speak, ϑέλω δὲ πάντας ὁμᾶς λαλεῖν] with tongues, but rather 
that ye prophesied [might prophesy, zpogytedyte]: for [but, d¢}' greater zs he that 
prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church 
[congregation, ἐχχλησία] may receive edifying. [But, δὲ] Now, brethren, if I come 
unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you 
either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine [teaching, 
διδαχῇ] And [om. And] even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or 
harp, [yet ὅμως ἐὰν] except they give’ a distinction in the sounds,’ how shall it be 
known what is piped or harped? For [also, χαὶ] if the trumpet give an uncertain 
sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by 
the tongue words [a word] easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken ? 
for ye shall speak into the air. There are,‘ it may be, so many kinds of voices in the 
world, and none of them® ἐξ [none are] without signification. Therefore if I know 
not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian [foreigner, 
βάρβαρος, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian [foreigner] unto me. Even so 
ye, forasmuch as ye are Zealous of spiritual gi/ts [spirits, πνευμάτων], seek that ye may 
excel [abound, περισσεύητε] to the edifying of the church [congregation]. _Where- 
fore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue [a tongue] pray that [in order that, 
ἵνα] he may interpret. For if I pray in an wnknown tongue [a tongue], my spirit 
prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the 
spirit, and’ [but, δὲ] I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spi- 
rit, and’ I will sing with the understanding also. Else, when thou shalt bless* with 
the spirit [shalt have blessed in spirit, εὐλογῆς πνεύματι], how shall he that occupieth 
the room [place] of the unlearned [one not so gifted, ἐδεώτου say [the, τὸ] Amen at 
thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? For thou verily 
givest thanks well [verily thou doest well to give thanks, ob μὲν yap καλῶς εὐχαριστεῖς], 
but the other is not edified. I thank my [om. my]® God, I speak'’® with tongues 
[a tongue, γλώσσῃ |" more than ye all: Yet in the church [congregation] I had rather 
speak five words with my understanding,” that by my voice [orally, χατηχήσω] I might 
teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue [in a tongue]. Bre- 
thren, be not children in understanding [minds, ταῖς φρεσίν] : howbeit in malice © 
[ wickedness, xaxéa] be ye children [babes], but in understanding [minds] be men [full 
grown,réde:or]. In the law it is [has been, γέγραπται] written, With [in, ἐν] men of other 
tongues and other’ lips [in lips of others, ἐν yetAeow ἑτέροις] will I speak unto this 
people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore [the, 
af] tongues are for a sign, not to [for] them that believe, but to [for] them that be- . 
lieve not: but prophesying serveth [the prophesying is] not for them that believe not, 
but for them which believe. If therefore the whole church [congregation] be come 
together into one place, and all speak with tongues,‘ and there come in those that are 
unlearned [not specially gifted, ἰδιῶται], or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are 
mad? But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one un- 
learned [not miraculously endowed], he is convinced of [by, ὑπὸ] all, he is judged of 
[by] all: And thus® are [om. And thus are] the secrets of his heart [are] made Ἰπὰ- 
nifest ; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is 


} in you of a truth [in truth is in you]. How is it then, brethren ? when ye come to- 


gether, every one of you [each one, ἕχαστος, om. of you]'® hath a psalm, hath a docs 
trine [a teaching, διδαχὴν], hath a tongue, hath a revelation [hath a revelation, hath 
a tongue],” hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. If any 
map speak in an wnknown tongue [a tongue, γλώσσῃ], let it be by two vor at the most 
by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there tse no interpreter, 
let him keep silence in the church [congregation]; and let him 8". eak to himself, and 
to God. Let the prophets speak two or three, and let, the other judge. 
[But, δὲ] If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his 


CHAP. XIV. : 281 








31 peace. For ye may [can, δύνασϑε7 all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and 
32 all may be comforted. And the spirits’® of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 
33. For God is not the author of confusion [tumult, ἀκαταστασίας], but of peace, as [peace. 
34 As], in all churches [the congregations, ταῖς ἐχχλησίαις] of the saints.° Let your 
[saints, let, om. your] women keep silence in the churches [congregations]: for it is 
not permitted” unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience 
35 [in subjection, ὑποτασσέσϑωσαν ],33 as also saith the law. And if they will learn any 
thing, let them ask their [own, /d¢ovc] husbands at home: for it is a shame for wo- 
36 men [a woman, γυναικὶ) 5 to speak in the church [congregation].* What! came the 
37 word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to 
be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that 1 write unto you 
38 are the commandments [a commandment, ἐστὶν ἐντολή] of the Lord.” But if any man 
39 be ignorant, let him be ignorant.” Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid 
40 not to speak with tongues. [But, δὲ] Let all things be done decently and in order. 


1 Ver. 5.—Rec. has yap, and it has many MSS. in its favor, but the oldest (A. B.) read δὲ. [To these must now be added 
Sinait., a cursive of the 11th century, and the Copt. version. On the other hand, D. E. (F. G., the Ital. and Vulg., and some 
others, have yap έστιν, or est enim) K. L. Sinait., (3d hand), many cursives and versions, with Chrys., Theodt., Jerome and 
Ambrst., favor yap.—C. P. W.}. 

2 Ver, 7.—Rec. has δῷ, Tischendorf has διδῷ ; and this has strong but not decisive support. The δῷ might very natu- 
rally be an attempt to conform to the δῷ in ver. 8. [Lachmann and Alford receive δῷ on the authority of A. B. Ὁ. (1st 
hand), Sinait., many cursives, Orig., Chrys., @eum.—C. P. W.]. 

3 Ver. 7.—Lachm. has τοῦ φθόγγου, but it is not sufficiently sustained. [His principal evidence is B. (which, however, 
shows its uncertainty by omitting the τοῦ), and some Italic and Vulgate copies (which, with Pelag. and Bede, give sonitwum, 
or ex phthongis). After the preceding φωνὴν διδόντα the change of this dative into the genitive, and of the plural into the 
singular, was very natural (Meyer).—C. P. W.]. 

4 Ver. 10.—Tischendorf edits εἰσίν after the best MSS. The ἐστίν of the Rec. was probably a grammatical correction. 
Meyer, on the other hand, reasons that the singular verb is an amendment to suit the neuter plural noun. [See also Al 
ford. In behalf of the plural we have certainly the predominance of documentary proof: A. B. Ὁ. E. F. G., Sinait., seven 
cursives, with Clem., Damasc. and Theophyl.—C. P. W.]. 

5 Ver. 10.—The αὐτῶν of the Rec. has against it the best MSS. [A. B. Ὁ. F. G. Sinait., eleven cursives, Vulg., the Lat. 
version of E., with Clem., Damasc., Ambst., Bede.—(. P. W.]. 

[6 Ver. 13.—Rec. has Διόπερ instead of Διὸ, which is edited by Alford. The evidence in favor of Διὸ (A. B. Ὁ. E. F. G., 
Sinait., 17, Damasc.), is, on the whole, decisive, though the ancient Greek expositors are nearly all for Stomep.—C. P. W.]. 

7 Ver. 15.—The δὲ is left out in both instances before καὶ by many and excellent MSS. But there appear to be no sae 
tisfactory reasons for the omission. [The former is inserted by A. B. D. E. L., Sinait., many cursives, the Peschito, Copt., 
and several Greek Fathers; and the latter by A. Ὁ. E. Καὶ. L., Sinait., the later Syr., Copt., and the same Greek Fathers, 
Alford inserts both, and Lach. caucels only the second.—A. Ὁ. E. F.G., Sin., and three cursives have προσεύξωμαι before 
τῷ mvevu., but B. K. L., many cursives, the Vulg., and many Fathers have προσεύξομαι.---Ο. P. W.]. 

8 Ver. 16.—Lachm. has εὐλογῇῆς. The evidence for εὐλογήσης is by no means convincing. [It has F.G. K. L., many 
cursives, Chrys., Theodt., @cum., Theophyl., but evAoyys has A. B. D., Sinait. and Damasc.—C. P. W.]. 

9 Ver. 18.— Rec. inserts μου after θεῷ, but in opposition to the most decisive authorities. It was probably taken from 
chap. i.4 and Rom. i. 8. [It is omitted in A. B. D. E. F. G., Sinait., nine cursives, several Latin and Vulgate versions, the 
later Syr., Copt., Aeth., Chrys., Theodt. (codex), Jerome, Sedulius and Bede, but itis given in K. L., many cursives, Pe- 
schito, Ital., Vulg, Copt., and many Latin Fathers.—C. P. W.]. 

10 Ver. 18.— Rec. has λαλῶν, but it is feebly sustained. Others have ὅτι λαλῶ. [The principal witnesses for the Rec. 
are K. L., a number of cursives, Chrys., Theodt., Damasc.. Reiche defends it. But B. D. H. F. G., Sinait., 17, 67 (2d hand), 
the Ital., Vulg., Copt., Syr. (both), cum., Orig. and the Latin Fathers are decisive against it. A. omits both words. The 
insertion of ὅτι and the change into the participle are intelligible, if the original had been the difficult present, whereas 
the contrary change would have been without motive —C. P. W.]. 

11 Ver, 18.—Many and excellent MSS. have γλώσσαις with the Rec., but Meyer thinks it “ probably a change to favor a 
previous prejudice.” [It has for it B. K. L., many cursives, Syr. (both), Copt., Chrys., Theodt., and Orig.; but against it A. 
D.E. F. G., Sinait., Damasc., Ambst., Pelag., Bede. The Vulg. has quod omnium vestrum lingua loquor.—C. P. W.]. 

PS Ver. 19—Rec, with Tischendorf has διὰ τοῦ νοός μου, but the evidence is stronger in favor of τῷ νοΐ pov. {It must 
be conceded that the documentary evidence preponderates in favor of the dative (A. B. Ὁ. E. F. G., Sinait., 12 cursives, with 
the Vulg., Syr. (later), Copt. versions, and @icum., Orig., and the Latin Fathers), and that the harshness of saying that the 
understanding wes the instrument of speaking supplied a strong motive fora change. And yet Tisch., Meyer and Bloom- 
field think it more likely that the dative was an attempt to conform to ver. 15, and that Marcion’s reading (διὰ τὸν μόνον 
without μου) shows that the copyist must have had before him διὰ τοῦ νοός. 

18 Ver. 21.—Rec. has érépois, but it was probably occasioned by the preceding datives. 

14 Ver. 23.—There are various positions of the words πάντες γλώσσαις λαλῶσιν, but the sense of the passage is not af- 
fected by them. [A. B. F. G., Sinait., Boern., Basil, Theophyl., have πάντες Aad. yAdo.—C. P. W.]. 

15 Ver, 25.—Fec. has καὶ οὕτω τὰ κρυπτὰ (taken from the following καὶ οὕτω), but with inferior evidence of the MSS. 
(comp. Meyer). [Meyer thinks that ‘the result or consequence of which the Apostle was about to speak was thought by 
many most properly to commence here; and hence the subsequent καὶ οὕτω was anticipated here and left out in its proper 
place (as itis by Chrys:). Afterwards this second οὕτω would be in some cases reinserted without the removal of the first 
καὶ οὕτω." The MSS. which are against the words (καὶ οὕτω) in the beginning of the sentence are A. B. Ὁ. Εἰ. F. G. Sinait., 
pyle δα the Lat. Syr. (Pesch.), Copt., Acth., Arm. versions, Basil, Chrys., Cyr., and the Latin Fathers.— 

16 Ver, 26.—Rec. has ὑμῶν after ἕκαστος, but it remains quite uncertain. [It is omitted in A. B. Sinait. (1st hand), 74, 
and Copt., but is inserted by Ὁ. E. F.G. K. L., Sinait. (8d hand), almost all the versions and cursives, with Chrys., Theodt., 
Damasc. and the Latin Fathers.—C. P. W.]. 

W Ver. 26—Rec. has γλῶσσαν ἔχει ἀποκ. ἔχει, but this order of the words is feebly supported. [A. Β. Ὁ. BE. F. G., Si 
nait., cursives, Vulg., Copt., Syr. (both), Aeth. (both), Arab., Bas., Zcum., Theophyl. and Lat. Fathers have amok. ἔχει, 
γλῶσσαν éxer.—C. P. W.]. 

18 Ver. 32.—Rec. gives as a Var. Reading, πνεῦμα instead of πνεύματα. This was a correction. because the plural 
seemed strange. [Alford says: “As one Spirit inspired all the prophets, πνεύματα was not understood.” A. B. K.L., Sinait., 
many cursives, Vulg., Copt., Syr. (later)., Orig., Epiph., Chrys., Theodt., Damasc., icum., TheophyL, Tert., Didym., haye 
the plural.—c. P. W.]. ᾿ 

[19 Ver. 33.—The words ὡς ἐν πάσαις τ. ἐκκλ. τ. ἁγίων are juined with ver. 34, and ἃ period is put αὖ εἰρήνης by Lachmann, 
Tischendorf, Meyer, Stanley. Conybeare, Hodge, Kling, and most of the later commentators. (Zachm. puts a comma after 
éxkAno., 80 that ἁγίων becomes emphatic, and ai γυναῖκες, without ὑμῶν belongs ἴο 10). Osiander, Neander, Bloomfield, 
Alford and Wordsworth adhere to the punctuation of the Fathers and of all modern Comm. until Cajetan, according to 
which these words are joined to the preceding. Some MSS. (F.G Vulg., Syr. (later), Arm. and Chrys.) add διδάσκω after 
εἰρήνησ. It was probably taken from chap. iv. 17.—C. P. W.]. 


’ 


282 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
ee 

20 Ver. 34.—Here, as in ver. 26, ὑμῶν is very doubtful. Neither here nor there are the MSS. decisive against the word, 
[Tischendorf and Reiche defend it, with Ὁ. E. F. G, K. L., cursives, Syr. (both), Aral., Slav., Chrys., Theodt., Theophyl., 
Ccum., Amb., Aimbst.; but it is left out by Lachm. and Alford, with A. B., Sinait., Vulg., Copt., Aeth., Arm. and some 
Fathers. It seemed superfluous, but its antiquity, especially in the East, makes it probable —C. P. W.]. 

21 Ver 34.—Rec. and Tischendorf have ἐπιτέτραπται, hut it is not so well sustained as the present ἐπιτρέπεται. [It had 
become common to regard the law as of only former validity, and yet in this matter it was natural for the Apostle in his 
time to speak of its present signification. The authority of the oldest and best uncials (A. B. D.E. F. G. Sinait.), the- 
Vulg., Ital., Basm. versions, all the Latin and some of the Greek writers, is in favor of the verb in the present— 
Lon Aa tie 

22 Wer. 34.—Lachmann, on the authority of some good MSS., edits ὑποτασσέσθωσαν. Meyer, however, considers it a 
gloss. [It has for it A. (adds τοῖς ἀνδράσιν), B., Sinait., seven cursives, Copt., Basm., Marc., Epiph., Damasc. The infinitive 
has for it the weight of the cursives, the versions, and the Fathers.—C. P. W.]. ; 

23 Ver. 35. Rec. with many MSS. has γυναιξίν for γνναικὶ, but it was probably a correction to make the word conform 
to the preceding plurals. 

. [4 Vers. 34, 35.—These two verses are placed after ver. 40 by Ὁ. E. F. G., Ital., Ambst. and Sedul.—C. P. W.]. 

2% Ver. 37.—Rec. has τοῦ κυρίου εἰσὶν ἐντολαί. Lachmann has more authority for ἐστίν ἐντολή. But both are probably 
glosses. Some MSS. have θεοῦ instead of κυρίου, but their authority is very feeble. 

26 Ver. 38.—Lachmann, after many Greek and Latin MSS., has ἀγνοεῖται, instead of ayvoeitw. It was probably an 
oversight of transcribers. See Meyer and exeg. notes. [In favor of the indicative is: A. (lst hand—the present —ac seems to 
bea rescript for a former τῳ of the 180 hand), D. (Ist hand), F.G., Sinait., Orig. and the Latin writers. Some versions (in 
cluding the Vulg.) and fathers have ignorabitur, and Hilar. has non cognoscetur. The ὦ might easily haye fallen out, as 
ἀγνοείτω and the following ὥστε were anciently written continuously and without punctuation, and then the at could be 
supplied. On the other hand, it is difficult to imagine a sufficient motive for changing the indicative into the imperative. 
The sense of the indic. would also have been quite ambiguous, while that of the imper. was very much in Paul’s spirit and 


manner.—C. P. W.]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 1-5. [He now turns from his digression 
to the main topic on hand, viz., the proper ma- 
nagement of spiritual gifts. Before entering on 
this, however, he presses a final exhortation in 
regard to that which he had been so warmly 
eulogizing|.—Pursue love,—. e., use all dili- 
gence in obtaining and cultivating it; chase it 
as a hunter pursues his game; press towards it 
as your chief good, as men make for the goal in 
a race; such is the force of διώκειν here (Rom. 
x..80; xii; 18, 195) Phil. iii. 12,14). The 
omission of all inferential particles like οὖν adds 
to the energy of the injunction.—but be zeal- 
ous for the spiritual gifts,—the same lan- 
guage as is used in xii. 31. But itis not simply 
to resume what was there said, as though all 
that intervened was but a parenthesis [so Stan- 
ley]. Rather, the dé, but, is designed to set the 
second clause over against the first, by way of 
showing that though they were to pursue love, 
still this was not to prevent their seeking for 
spiritual gifts also. In urging the former he was 
not intending to disparage the latter, as they 
might be disposed to infer. Hence we may ren- 
der δέ by meantime, however, or nevertheless. Ne- 
ander takes the second injunction in the light of 
a permission, rather than of a positive command, 
and supposes that Paul chose the stronger word 
in the first instance in order to teach his readers 
that a Christian’s main endeavor should be to 
become quickened by love. [ ‘“‘He observes, 
therefore, an admirable medium by disapproving 
of nothing that was useful, without at the same 
time preferring, by an absurd zeal, things of 
less consequence to what was of primary impor- 
tance.” CAtvin].—In regard to spiritual gifts 
see on xii. 1. A more restricted application of 
the term here, to denote simply ‘the gift of ton- 
gues,’ might, indeed, be favored by the contrast 
implied inthe ‘‘rather” directly following, and by 
ver. 2, and also by ver. 14ff., inasmuch as the 
gift of tongues, because it was a speaking and 
praying in the spirit, might well be called by way 
of preéminence ‘ spiritual.’ But the plural form, 
as well as the more extended connection had with 
the foregoing chapter, declare for the broader 
interpretation of: gifts in general.—but rather 


--μᾶλλον is to be construed comparatively and 
not as==uddiora, g. d., ‘more than all the other 
gifts. —that ye may prophesy.—Instead of 
using the noun ‘ prophecy,’ he employs the verb 
with the telic iva, as the object of ζηλοῦτε, be 
zealous for. In this there was undoubtedly a 
design; but not such asto warrant Meyer’s ren- 
dering, ‘in order that ye may prophesy.’ [Stan- 
ley says, that iv ais here passing into the Ro- 
maic sense, in which it is used as a substitute for 
the infinitive. Comp. for this use, ver. 12; 
Matth. vii. 12: Mark vi. 8, 25. See also Winer, 
P. 1, xi. δ lxiii. 2, 1]. The reason of the prefe- 
rence he next assigns.—F'or he that speaks 
with a tongue,—~. ¢.,insome strange language 
prompted by the spirit. [Bloomfield takes the 
ἐς speaking ” (λάλῶν) to signify preaching, exhort- 
ing, and says, ‘ the context requires this ;’ but it 
must be the context only as read in the light of 
a certain theory. There is nothing in the lan- 
guage to warrant it, and to construe it thus would ᾿ 
be to make this the only passage where the gift 
of tongues must be supposed to have been used 
in addressing others directly ].—speaketh not 
to men,—~. 6., not with the design of imparting 
anything that fhe hearers can understand and 
profit by.—but to God:—It is with God that 
he is in communication, [‘‘ according to the pro- 
verb: ‘He sings to Himself and the muses’ ”,.— 
Catvin]. Of this the proof—first, negatively.— . 
for no one heareth.—By this he does not 
mean literally ‘ heareth not,’ as though the words 
were inaudible, like those muttered by Hannah, 
1 Sam. i. 18; since this would neither suit the 
expression ‘speaketh;’ nor yet the context, es- 
pecially of ver. 7; nor yet the corresponding pas- 
sage in Acts ii. 10, 19. The word ἀκούειν rather 
denotes here the inward hearing, the mental ap- 
preciation of what was uttered. [So the word 
is used in Acts xxii. 9, where the attendants of 
Paul are said not to have ‘ heard the voice’ which 
in Acts ix. 7 they were said to have heard—an 
ambiguity which can be explained only by taking 
the word in the former instance to mean ‘un- 
derstand.’ See also Mark iv. 33. ‘He spake 
as they were able to hear;” also Gen. xi: 7; 
xlii. 23; Is. xxxvi. xi. where for ‘ understand’ 
the Ixx. has ἀκούειν]. The negative “πὸ one” 
is not hyperbolical as if signifying ‘very few,’ 
but absolute; the exception arising from the ax 


CHAP. XIV. 283 





sistance of some interpreter will of course be 
understood.—but in the spirit he speaketh 
mysteries.—The ‘but’ is not designed to ex- 
press a contrast, as though equivalent to son- 
dern (Riickert); but it is explicative, introducing 
a further specification, vz., ‘‘in the spirit ;” 
while the remaining words alone state the anti- 
thesis to what is asserted in the previous clause. 
The word ‘‘ mysteries” is not to be understood 
as in iv. 1.; xiii. 2. [As Sranuey, ‘Here, as else- 
where, it means ‘God’s secrets;’ here, however, 
not as elsewhere in thesense of secrets revealed, but 
in the sense (nearly approaching to the modern 
word mystery) of secrets concealed. The only 
other instance is Rev. xvii. 5.” And ALrorD: 
‘*Things which are hidden from the hearers, and 
sometimes also from the speaker himself’’]. So 
understood, the statement would, as related to 
the previous one, appear tautological; hence the 
words “ἴῃ the spirit’ must here be so taken as 
intended to bring out more fully the character- 
istic of the gift in question. Accordingly they 
must be interpreted not simply of the inward 
man, g. d., ‘he speaks to himself in his own 
thoughts’ (Le Clere, Locke, Semler). Still less 
can πνεύματι be the objective dative either to 
λαλεῖ, or to μυστήρια, g.d., ‘he speaks things 
which are mysteries for the spirit of others.’ 
Rather the expression is used here as in ver. 14, 
of the activity of the higher religious conscious- 
ness, uninfluenced by reflection (Meyer), [‘‘of 
the spirit as opposed to the understanding, his 
spirit as the organ of the Holy &thost while the 
understanding is unfruitful” (Alford)], of the 
inner life as abstracted from the outer world 
(Beek), ‘‘ of a state of inspiration only through 
the medium of the intuitional side of the human 
spirit directed God-ward—a state in which the 
self-consciousness is, as it were, suppressed or 
overpowered by the divine influence completely 
taking possession of the human soul; in short, 
of astate of mystic ecstasy which, when par- 
taking of the character.of a gift, creates for itself 
a form of speech in which the soul breaks forth, 
as it were in holy dithyrambies” (Delitzsch v. 
ἢ 5). [So also De Wette; πνεύματι he ex- 
plains by ‘through the spirit,” 7. e., his higher 
unconscious spiritual faculty which is filled by 
the Holy Spirit, and is without the νοῦς. Bloom- 
field and Hodge, however, follow the Greek com- 
mentators, and most early modern ones, in taking 
the word “spirit” to mean, not the higher spiri- 
tual powers of our nature, but the Holy Ghost 
as in chap. viii. 14. ‘In favor of this interpreta- 
tion is: 1, The prevailing use of the word Spirit 
in reference to the Holy Ghost in all Paul’s epis- 
tles and especially in this whole connection. 2. 
That the expression to ‘speak in” or ‘by the 
Spirit,” is an established Scriptural phrase, 
meaning to speak under the guidance of the 
Holy Spirit. 3. When spirit is to be distin- 
guished from the wnderstanding, it designates the 
affections; a sense which would not at all suit 
this passage. 4. The meaning arrived at by 
this interpretation is natural and suitable to the 





* [This work of Delitzsch presents a masterly analysis of 
Biblical doctrine on this and all kindred subjects, and de- 
serves a better translation than that it has suffered from 
the hands of Dr. Wallis. It cannot be understood in that 
English dress]. 














connection. ‘‘Although he who speaks with 

tongues is not understood yet guided by the 

Spirit, he speaks mysteries.” Hopaxr. To thig 

it may be replied in order 1. That πνεῦμα, when 

used without any qualifying term in Paul’s writ- 

ings, more commonly denotes the higher nature: 
of man, especially as quickened by the Holy 
Ghost. 2. In every instance where the idea of 

speaking ‘‘in the Holy Ghost’ isintended, it isin-- 
dicated by the use of the prep. ἐν, in, and usually 
with the addition of the article (as in Rom. i. 93. 
vili. 9; xv. 16; 1 Cor. vi. 11). Wherever the 
simple anarthrous dative πνεύματι is found 88. 
here, to denote that in reference to which a. 
thing is done, it stands for the spirit of man, ass 
might be expected (Jno. iv. 24; Rom. viii. 18 5; 
1 Cor. iv. 21; vii. 34; Gal. v. 5, 16). It is im 
this broader sense that the word is here to be: 
understood. It means not simply the intellect,_ 
but the higher nature of man in all its emotions: 
as stirred by the Holy Spirit. 4. While the- 
meaning ‘‘in the Holy Spirit” gives good sense: 
even here, still the other meaning is more in ac- 

cordance both with the wsus loguendi, and with. 
the train of argument, and should therefore be- 
adhered to as it is by all English versions, and: 
by nearly all commentators ].—The case is other-- 
wise with the prophet.—He that prophesies. 
speaks unto men—In the prophet who is- 
called to be the mediator of divine mysteries in 

behalf of others, there is united with the state- 
of ecstasy (which however is not the exclusive- 
mode of revelation with him), the ability of re- 

producing that which he has seen in the spirit, 

by the aid of his understanding and psychical. 
faculties in adequate and intelligible language 

(Delitzsch 95). What the prophet imparts is. 
threefold, —edification, and exhortation, 

and comfort.—The first of these terms (οὐκο- 

dou%), properly implying a building up of the- 
Christian life in its successive stages, may be 

taken as expressing the genus of which the other- 
two express the species, though not all the spe- 

cies. By παράκλησις, exhortation, we under-- 
stand that by which the will is aroused to greater- 
earnestness in self-culture and to greater Chris- 

tian activity and to more zealous endeavors, 

[Sran.ey who unites with exhortation the mean-- 
ing of consoling or strengthening as in the word’ 
παράκλητος, Comforter, says: “ΠΟΥ closely con- 
nected this gift was with prophesying may be- 
seen in the fact that the name of ‘ Barnabas,” 
‘the son of prophesy,’ is rendered in Acts iv. 36+ 
υἱὸς παρακλήσεως, ‘the son of consolation.’” By- 
παραμυϑία we understand that by which the- 
spirit is quieted and cheered. Though sharing- 
with the former, the sense of consolaiion, it im-- 
plies something more tender and soothing. As to- 
the conjunctions «ac-« a¢, the first may be taken: 
as annexing to the chief word something further~ 
explanatory, like and indeed; or they may be- 
taken as distributive particles, both and. Osi-- 
ander follows the earlier commentators in co-- 
ordinating the three particulars, and gives to 
the first a relation to faith as implying the. 
furtherance and strengthening of the Christian. 
life therein ; to the second, a relation to love as 
implying a stimulus to the cultivation of it, as in 

the more active duties of Christianity; and to 

the third, a relation to hope, as the source and 


284 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— 


effect of all comfort; furthermore, he subordi- | with some good authority we read dé, but, instead 
nates the two last to the first as their root.— } of yap, we must regard him as simply continuing 
That a subordination here is intended is sus-| his discourse.—but greater is he that pro- 


tained by the fact that the word ‘edification” 
returns again alone in ver. 4.—But he that 
speaks with a tongue edifies himself ;— 
He here refers to the effect of those inward ex- 
citements and elevating impressions which a 
person experiences in this intercourse with 
God—in this state of prayer and praise, or of 
mystic ecstasy wherein the operations of the 
Holy Spirit reach their culminating point (comp. 
Delitzsch, as above). ‘‘ This does not imply a 
benefit derived through a distinct understanding 
of that which he speaks; but there is left upon 
the spirit of the speaker an impression made by 
the whole experience, of a quickening and ele- 
vating though mystical kind.” Meyer. And 
in like manner OstanpER: ‘‘ He could allow the 
total impression and feeling of his discourse to 
work on in him.” [“ This view is necessary on 
account of what is said in ver. 5, that if he can 
interpret, he can edify not only himself, but the 
church.” Atrorp. ΗΌΡΟΕ, on the contrary, 
ignoring the fact that any benefit could be de- 
rived excepting through a distinct intelligence 
of what was uttered, says, ‘‘this verse proves 
that the understanding was not in abeyance, and 
that the speaker was not in an ecstatic state.” 
But this is a mere assumption, against which 
might be put the following counter testimony: 
“The gift might and did contribute to the build- 
ing up of a man’s own life (1 Cor. xiv. 4). This 
might be the only way in which some natures 
could be roused out of the apathy of a sensual 
life, or the dulness of aformalritual. The ecstasy 
of adoration which seemed to men madness, 
might be a refreshment unspeakable to one who 
‘was weary with the subtle questionings of the in- 
tellect, to whom all familiar and intelligible 
words were fraught with recollections of contro- 
versial bitterness or the wanderings of doubc. 
(Comp. a passage of wonderful power as to this 
use of the gift by Edw. Irwing. ‘Morning Watch,’ 
v. p. 78.) See Smirn’s Bib. Dict. Ὁ. 1558].—but 
he that prophesies edifies the church.— 
The article before ἐκκλησίαν is unnecessary. 
‘The church as a collection of individuals is here 
brought forward in contrast with the speaker 
himself. [Not so however Alford. ‘‘ The arti- 
cle,” as he says, ‘‘being often omitted, when a 
noun in government has an emphatic place be- 
fore the verb; accordingly in ver. 5 the article 
reappears” ],—Lest any should think that he was 
here seeking to set aside all speaking with 
tongues as calculated to provoke envy, he pro- 
ceeds—I would that ye all spake with 
‘tongues,—This must be regarded as a hearty 
wish and not an unworthy concession to the Co- 
rinthians, on the score of their partiality for 
this gift. This isevident from the fact that he 
goes on at once toadduce prophecy as the higher 
and worthier gift which he still more earnestly 
desires that they should have and exercise.— 
but rather that ye prophesied.—He here 
‘passes over into the telic construction with iva, 
‘indicating a stronger intention towards the 
higher object’? (Osiander). According to the 
common reading μείζων γάρ, for greater, he adds 
reason for what has just been said. But if 





phesieth than he that speaketh with 
tongues,—The greatness here consists in use- 
fulness, and hence also in dignity. This how- 
ever is qualified by the exception,—except— 
ἐκτὸς et μή. The μῇ here appears pleonastic 
(xv. 2; 1 Tim. v. 19). [This redundant ex- 
pression arises from the blending of two con- 
structions, ἐκτὸς εἰ and εἰ μῆ, instances of which 
are found also in the classics. Hence, not a 
Hebraism. Winer iii. 3 653c.].—he inter- 
pret.—The subject of the verb is not any other 
person, but the speaker himself who could unite 
the two gifts of speaking with tongues and in- 
terpretation in himself. By the exercise of the 
latter gift for the purpose of edifying the church, 
he put himself on a par with him that prophesied. 
In regard to the subjunctive form after εἰ comp. 
on chap. ix. 11, (respectum comprehendit experientiae. 
Meyer). [Hong says: ‘this passage proves 
that the contents of these discourses delivered 
in an unknown, tongue were edifying; and 
therefore did not cansist in mysteries in the bad 
sense of that term, 7. 6.5 in enigmas and dark say- 
ings. The absence of the gift of interpretation 
does not prove that the speaker himself in such 
cases was ignorant of what he uttered. It only 
proves that he was not inspired to communicate 
in another language what he had delivered.” 
The reasoning is not conclusive. It is grounded 
on the assumption that no benefit could be de- 
rived from any experiences that were not dis- 
tinctly intelligible and capable of being commu- 
nicated under the ordinary forms of thought and 
language. And it may be asked if that which 
was spoken in the unknown tongue was distinctly 
intelligible to the speaker, what need was there 
of a special gift of interpretation to enable him to 
communicate it tothe church? The understand- 
ing (νοῦς) is the parent of language; and what a 
person understood he surely could utter. Would 
this not be in violation of a well known rule, ‘not 
to introduce a divinity upon the stage unless the 
occasion required it’ ]?—Ver. 6-11. But now,— 
νυνὶ δέ here also as in xiii. 18 in a logical 
sense, g. d., ‘since in speaking with tongues the 
edification of the church depends altogether upon 
the interpretation which followed, then without 
this, —if I come unto you speaking with 
tongues,—he uses himself as an illustration 
without laying stress upon his personality, [as 
Chrys.], in which case αὐτὸς ἐγώ, I myself, would 
be required; or it is a mode of individualizing 
the case as is found in vv. 11, 14; xiii. 1, 12.— 
what shall I profit you,—This question here 
forms the main propos.tion which (as often hap- 
pens in the classics) is inserted between the two 
hypothetical clauses, the second of which stands: 
in contrast with the first, or is its negative paral- 
lel (not its subordinate so as to indicate how the 
speaking with tongues must take place ; nor yet 
does it stand in any closer internal relation to 
the main proposition).—unless I shall speak 
unto you either by revelation,—The ἐν, in, 
or, y, denotes as in Matt. xiii. 8 the form which 
his discourse might take, or the sphere in which 
it would move.—or by knowledge, or. by 
prophesying, or by doctrine ?—The four 


CHAP. XIV. 


286 


πα νυν υνεον sre lenin See hl ee a pe eit ds i σι στον 


things specified may be referred back to two 
gifts: first, to prophecy, whose ground and 
contents is revelation; and secondly to doctrine 
which rests upon knowledge and furnishes its 
fruit; [as Hopazsays, ‘there are not four, but only 
two modes of address contemplated in this verse. 
Revelation and prophecy belong to one, and 
knowledge and doctrine to the other. He who 
received revelations, was a prophet; he who had 
the word of knowledge, was a teacher.” So like- 
wise Calvin. This construction is derived from 
the sense, and not from the grammar of the text. 
There the four items stand codrdinate as though 
distinct and independent]. Revelation is to be 
understood as in ver. 26, subjectively (otherwise 
in i. 7). It signifies occasional disclosures re- 
specting anything which concerns the kingdom 
of God, or an unveiling of mysteries. As what 
is thus disclosed is uttered in the ardent and 
rapt discourse of the prophet, so, that which 
an enlightened inquiry affords for furthering our 
insight into divine things, is expressed in the 
calmer diction of the teacher, and is termed doc- 
trine. As Bencet says:* “prophecy relates to 
particular facts, not well understood before, to 
mysteries to be known only by revelation.” 
Doctrine and knowledge are brought from the 
common storehouse of believers, and refer to ob- 
vious things in the matter of our salvation.—He 
next proceeds to illustrate his point by various 
analogies; and first from musical instruments. 
Some difficulty arises as to the proper rendering 
of what follows, in consequence of the unnatural 
position of ὅμως. Some take this as equivalent 
to ὁμοίως, in like manner; but this would be 
unsuitable and unnecessary. The signification, 
nevertheless, yet even, would fit better. But still 
it is questionable whether the word mainly af- 
fects or gives prominence ἰο τὰ ἄψυ χα, lifeless 
things, as its position appears to indicate; so 
that this drawn out in full would be τὰ ἄψυχα 
καίπερ ἄψυχα, ὅμως, ‘lifeless instruments, though 
lifeless, yet give sound’ (Winer); or whether by 
it the thing introduced in proof is set up as ab- 
solutely valid against all objection, g. d., ‘one 
cannot yet understand,’ 7. ¢., ‘this must at any 
rate be conceded, that we cannot understand’ 
(de Wette); or, whether, by virtue of a transpo- 
sition which appears also in Gal. iii. 15, and 
elsewhere in the classics, the word is placed first, 
while it properly belongs before ἐάν; so that 
the concessive protasis isformed by the words 
φωνὴν διδόντα, which then would be equi- 
valent to καίπερ φωνήν διδόντα. The last con- 
struction is the correct one, being the only one 
which corresponds to the use of language, and to 
the course of thought.—Things without life, 
although yielding sound, whether flute 
or harp, yet if they do not—Respecting the 
various positions occupied by ὅμως, how the 
word or clause limited by it sometimes precedes 
and sometimes follows it as here, comp. Passow ii. 
lp. 77. By being put first it carries an empha- 
sis. ‘*There is an inference drawn from the 
less to the greater,” g. d., if, indeed, such is the 
case with lifeless objects, how. much more must 
it be with men ?—give a distinction to the 
tones,—. 6., by various distinct modulations of 
high and low, strong and weak.—how shall it 
be known what is piped or harped ?— 











This refers to the significance of that which is 
played on each instrument (comp. ver. 8 ff.): 
ἢ. é., ‘a person will, in that case, not be able to 
discern or perceive what tune is played.’ [The 
article is here repeated to show that two distinct 
instances are contemplated, not necessarily one 
tune either piped or harped. Meyer regards 
this passage as decisive against the opinion that 
the tongues used in the gift in question were dis- 
tinctly articulated foreign languages, and that 
the utterancein this case was a confused jargon 
of sounds, such as that which would be made 
through the instruments without observing their 
proper modulations. But this is pressing the 
analogy too far. The point made is simply with 
reference to the unintelligibleness of the things 
played, unless the well-known laws of the in- 
strument and of the music were observed]. 
The argument is confirmed by another example 
of the same kind, which sets the case in a still 
clearer light.—For also,—[The ‘ for” serves for 
a climax, the higher confirming the lower].—if 
the trumpet gives an uncertain sound,— 
The trumpet, so strong inits tones, and unmis- 
takable in its character, even this requires a 
certain definite modulation when giving its va- 
rious signals, if it is tobe known whether the 
signal is one for battle or not. The adjective 
«uncertain ”’ expresses the antithesis to the pre- 
vious expression, ‘‘give a distinction to the 
sounds.” [Different sounds of the same trumpet 
summoned soldiers to different duties, one suc- 
cession of notes giving the signal for attack, and 
another for retreat. Hence the question],—who 
shall prepare himself for the battle ?— 
The application to the point in question he next 
proceeds to make.—So likewise ye, through 
the tongue,—These words are put first by way 
of emphasis, as contrasting the Corinthians in 
the exercise of their divine gift with the lifeless 
things which he has just been speaking of.—un- 
less ye give a word easy to be under- 
stood,—tThis clause unquestionably stands op- 
posed to the assumption that inarticulate sounds 
are implied in the gift, if for no other reason 
than on account of the use of the term ‘ word,”’ 
which denotes a rational, articulate utterance, 
even though we would wish to take the qualify- 
ing expression in with it. Nor is it favored by 
the other expression ‘‘ through the tongue,” as 
though this meant the simple organ of speech; 
for in that case it would only be used as in con- 
trast with the musical instruments specified.— 
how shall it be known what is spoken ? 
for ye shall be (ἔσεσ ϑ ε so long as ye speak) 
a speaking into the air.—cic¢ ἀέρα λαλοῦν- 
τες; the phrase denotes the uselessness of an 
unintelligible discourse. It dies away into the 
atmosphere, reaching not the mind of the hearer. 
—He next pushes his range of analogy still far- 
ther, so as to include the various human lan- 
guages which can furnish no means of inter* 
course between man and man, so long as their 
meaning is not understood.— There are, it may 
be,—ei τύ χοι, a phrase commonly found witb 
numerical nouns, and never means for example , 
it only states the number as problematical, or 
denotes uncertainty in the more definite state- 
ment.—so many—ro oaira. [‘‘ The word here 
has the force of a definite number. If men could 


280 





ever have counted the number, Paul would have 
set it down here; but he leaves it indefinite.” 
Bence. |.—kinds of voices in the world,— 
φωνή, voice, here signifies ‘ speech,’ or ‘language,’ 
(as also in Gen. xi. 1,7; and in the classics of- 
ten, and γένη φωνῶν denotes the ‘ various lan- 
guages,’ of which each one forms a yévoc, genus. 
He does not use the word γλῶσσα, tongue, because 
in this whole paragraph this is employed to de- 
note the special gift which is under considera- 
tion.—and none—ovdév refers to γένη. It 
does not mean ‘no rational creature;’ but the 
right relation is expressed by the αὐτῶν, of them, 
of the Rec. which, however, is not original.— 
is without signification.—d ων ον, literally 
speechless (like βίος aBiaroc), ἱ. e., ‘ without that 
which is the essential thing in speech,’ ‘ unsuited 
for the purpose of intelligible communication.’ 
«<The Apostle intends to say that every language 
has its definite signification; inasmuch as it is 
designed to be the vehicle for communicating 
thought.” Neanper. [Hopae says, ‘“ The il- 
lustration contained in this verse goes to prove 
that speaking with tongues was to speak in fo- 
reign languages.” If by ‘foreign languages ” 
is meant languages of other countries on the 
globe, then spoken, ‘the inference is too broad. 
It supposes that no other language was possible, 
save such as were then in vogue. If language is 
God’s gift, and not a mechanical contrivance of 
man, why could not the Spirit inspire men to 
utter their new experiences in a new and ‘clean 
speech,” which, though used by none others, was 
fully entitled to be called alanguage? And may 
it not have been one intent of the Spirit in the 
production of this new language to furnish a sign 
that the things it reveals were such ‘‘as eye had 
not seen, nor ear heard, nor had entered into 
the heart of man” to conceive, and such there- 
fore as required to be expressed in forms cor- 
responding? To understand these “tongues” 
to denote foreign pagan languages, most of which 
were but the defiled vessels of impurity and 
falsehood and idolatry, and utterly inadequate 
to convey spiritual truth, is to miss the import 
of this remarkable phenomenon].—From the 
fact that none of the various languages of earth 
lacked the character of language, wiz., the power 
of communicating thought, he goes on to infer 
that where one person was incapable of under- 
standing another, there was reason to believe 
that they stood in the relation of foreigners to 
each other. This would not be inferred were 
the ‘“‘speech” ‘‘without speech” (ἀφωνος), ἱ. 6., 
in itself unintelligible, since the speaker in this 
case could be understood by no one. He might 
be looked upon as one deranged, but not as a 
foreigner. The very force (δύναμις) of the lan- 
guage, its sense, its significance, viz., is pre- 
cisely that thing which would be excluded by its 
being “ without speech” (déwvoc).—Therefore, 


if I know not the force of the language, I ' 


shall be to him that speaketha barbarian,— 
Βάρβαρος, the common term to designate one not a 
Greek, one who stood outside the sphere of the 
Greek language and culture. Here it is used in no 
bad sense, but simply to denote a stranger.—and 
he that speaketh a barbarian in me.—As in 
the former clause, τῷ AaAowvrvr cis the dative of 
judgment, meaning, ‘in the estimation of him that 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— 


speaketh ;’ so ἐν ἐμοὶ, in me, must be construed 
‘in my eyes,’ or ‘according to my judgment,’ 
(comp. Passow i. 2, p. 909.) 

Vers. 10-19. The connection with the previous 
verse is more correctly determined by making 
the conditional clause here refer to what was 
perverse in their desires and efforts as corres- 
ponding with the relation set forth in the pre- 
vious verse, where it was shown that by reason 
of not understanding the language spoken, one 
appeared to the other as a foreigner; and by 
regarding the injunction which follows as urging 
them to the adoption of a contrary course,— 
first, in an indefinite general way; from which 
he at once proceeds in ver. 13 to draw the in- 
ference in relation to the matter in question, viz., 
speaking with tongues.—So also ye,—This 
expression is used as in ver. 9; the ‘‘so” in- 
dicates that which corresponds to the analogy 
previously introduced, and for this reason it 
stands at the beginning of the clause to which 
it belongs, as there. It is asif he had said: 
‘in this way, as ye are foreigners te each other 
from not understanding each other’s language, 
and no intercourse can take place between you— 
a condition of things which is palpably wrong,’ 
etc. So Meyer. Proceeding from this interpre- 
tation of the word ‘‘so,” some insert a colon or 
period after ‘‘ye,” making the clause mean 
‘such barbarians are ye who speak with tongues 
without interpreting ; but this would be to sepa- 
rate unnecessarily matters belonging together. 
Others construe the clause ‘‘so also ye”’ as an 
apodosis, implying that the Apostle meant to 
have them entirely avoid, making each other as 
barbarians. But in such a construction not 
only would there be no suitable relation to form 
the ground of a parallel, but a contrast, would 
be introduced. We should have to insert that 
in thought to which the ‘‘so” should refer, 
somehow after this fashion—‘in order to avoid 
coming into the relation of barbarians, it will 
be necessary to introduce an interpreter, so also 
should ye endeavor to make yourself plain.’ 
But where is the necessity of such a subaudition, 
if another explanation offers itself which is sus- 
tained by the analogy in ver. 9? [Alford and 
Bloomfield in accordance with the great majority 
of commentators from Chrys. interpret the con- 
nection more simply. They give οὕτως the 
sense of therefore, i. e., ‘after the lesson conveyed 
by this example,’ or, ‘to apply this to your 
case,’ which has the advantage of simplicity ].— 
since ye are zealots of spirits—{7/wrai 
πνευμάτων. i.e, ‘are ardently devoted to 
them and admire them;’ so the objective geni- 
tive often occurs in classical writers. ‘ Of 
spirits” is a bold expression, adopted in accor- 
dance with the diversity which appeared in the 
operations of the Spirit. The principle at work 
is itself spoken of as manifold. As OsIANDER 
says: ‘the individual gifts are designated as 
active powers, existing independently in those 
endowed with them.” Or as Meyer: ‘ what 
were in reality diversities of gifts, and therefore 
only different manifestations of the Spirit, pre- 
sented themselves to the popular apprebension 
as diversities of spirits.” That Paul himself 
actually believed in a plurality of spirits (Hil- 
genfeld) is at variance with xii. 4,7. Some, 


CHAP. XIV. 


287 


.-ρρρῤῤῤππΠππτΠΠΠπΠπΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠἕἁῥ τ τ τ ----------ρ-ρ--“------------.Ἂ--- 


arbitrarily, limit the word to denote simply the 
gift of tongues. It is here, however, to be taken 
in its broadest seuse as standing by metonymy 
for spiritual gifts in general.—He now comes 
for the first time to the practical application of 
his argument. The duty he urges upon them 
corresponds to the object for which spiritual 
gifts were given.—for the edification of the 
Church,—The end to be aimed at is put first 
by way of emphasis. But the words are not to 
be joined simply with the following imperative, 
—seek,—as though this was to be construed ab- 
solutely, and the words after it,—that ye may 
abound.—were to be construed as a final clause 
(Meyer), as though the meaning were: strive for 
the edification of the Church in order that ye 
may abound!—for the verb ζητεῖν, seek, can 
hardly be used without an object. This object 
is rather to be found in the verb following it, 
which is introduced in accordance with a later 
lax usage by iva, that,*—‘Seek that ye may 
abound,’ or, ‘seek to abound.’ Then the words, 
— for the edification of the Church, — would 
belong to the combined phrase ‘seek that 
ye may abound,’ and not to the latter verb ex- 
clusively, although this conveys the chief idea; 
at least not so that πρὸς should be made equi- 
valent to εἰς, and the sense this, ‘that the bless- 
ings of their gifts may be poured out more and 
more abundantly upon the Church for its edifi- 
cation.’—Next comes the application of this fun- 
damental principle to the matter of speaking 
with tongues. — Wherefore, let him that 
speaketh with a tongue, pray that he 
may interpret.—rpocevyéioty, ἵνα διερ- 
μενεύῃ. [This passage, simple as it seems, 
has caused no little perplexity among commen- 
tators. The mode of interpreting it has a de- 
cided bearing upon the theory a person may 
form in regard tothe nature of the ‘gift of 
tongues; and it in turn has been determined 
largely by whatever theory has already been 
formed. There are three ways of explaining it. 
1. To take iva inits laxer sense, and construe 
the verb dcepmevety with it as the object of 
προσευχέσϑω, g.d., ‘let him pray that he 
may be able to interpret,’ ὦ. ¢., for the gift of 
interpretation. This is the sense given it by all 
the Greek commentators, and is adopted by most 
of the modern ones. Among these Grot., Beza, 
Hamm., and Hodge. Adopting this view, we are 
at liberty to suppose that the person speaking 
with a tongue was not necessarily engaged in 
worship, but was addressing the assembly; and 
so to infer that this gift was used not only for 
the purposes of prayer and praise, but also for 
popular discourse. The objection to this view 
is, that in the subsequent argument in support 
of the injunction here given, the act of praying 
is spoken of absolutely; and standing, as the 
next verse does, in close logical connection with 
this by means of the ‘‘for,” we are constrained 
to interpret the praying spoken of in both verses 
in the same absolute or general sense, and that 





*[This would hardly comport with the theory that ἵνα 
always has to a greater or less degree a telic force. and so 
Bloomfeld subaudits ταῦτα, referring to πνευμάτων, the 
object of ζητεῖτε, g. d., ‘seek these things that ye may 
abound.” This corresponds better with its use in the fol- 
lowing clanse]. 








the use of the gift was in the act of prayer. 
Hence it will not do to limit the praying in this 
verse to the object specified in the final words, 
as though the Apostle meant that the person who 
was employing the gift, should pray that he 
might interpret. Besides, it assumes a purely 
echbatic signification in iva, which it is question- 
able whether it ever has in the New Testament. 
(See Winer, p. III. 3 ὅ8. 10. 6). 2. To take 
tva@ in the sense of ὥστε, so that, g. d., ‘let him 
so pray, that he may interpret,’ 7. 6., let him not 
pray unless he can interpret. So Luther, Rosen., 
and others. But the propriety of giving this 
sense to iva is very doubtful. The only way 
left us then is 8.7 toconstrue iva dreppevety, 
that he may interpret, as a final clause. [So Meyer, 
Winer, Alford, and others]. This would give to 
the whole injunction a meaning of this sort, 
‘In the outgushing of his emotions in prayer 
and praise let the person who speaks with a 
tongue, make it a point to edify the Church 
through interpretation.’ In other words, ‘let 
him pray, not in order to make a display of his 
gift, but with the intention of interpreting his 
prayer.’ This, of course, implies that the person 
alluded to has already the gift of interpretation, 
and very rightly, for otherwise he was not at 
liberty to allow himself to be heard in Church 
meeting at all (ver. 28).—The reason for this 
injunction is next more clearly set forth in ver. 
14, where the Apostle, agreeably to the hint al- 
ready given in ver. 2, enters more fully upon the 
inward character of this gift, and from what he 
says there it is clear that the mere speaking or 
praying with tongues without interpretation ex- 
cluded all relation to the external world, and in 
this case, to the congregation.—For if I pray 
with a tongue, my spirit prays, but my 
understanding is unfruitful.— Here the 
νοῦς denotes that faculty of the soul by which 
we have to deal with the outer world, [that 
which reasons, conceives and begets the thought 
that is coined into words] (BrEex, Bibl. Seelen- 
lehre, p. 49). This is said to be unfruitful in that 
it confers no benefit on others (comp. Eph. v. 
11; Tit. iii. 14; Matth. xiii. 22). The passive 
interpretation, ‘experiences no benefit,’ does 
not suit the connection. As the words ‘‘my 
understanding,” so must also the words ‘‘my 
spirit” be interpreted of that which belongs 
to our nature, and not be understood as meaning 
‘the spirit of Godin me’ [as Hodge]. On the 
other hand the antithesis with ‘‘my spirit” does 
not allow of our interpreting the word νοῦς to 
mean sense, that is, of the words. Brncen has 
already presented the essentially correct view: 
«©The πνεῦμα, spirit, is the power of the soul, 
when it sweetly suffers the Holy Spirit’s opera- 
tions; but the νοῦ ς, understanding, is the power 
of the soul, when it goes abroad, and acts with 
our neighbor: as also when it attends to external 
objects, to other things and persons, although 
its reasonings may be concealed.” [The distine- 
tion is more thoroughly given by Detirzscnu, 
Bibl. Psychologie, iv.35. In explaining this 
passage he says: ‘‘ The exercise of self-conscious- 
ness is here suppressed by the divine influence 
which entirely takes captive the person speak- 
ing with tongues. The thinking power of the 


|vowvc, as it brings forth fruit in words and 


#88 





thoughts profiting both itself and others without 
any further intervention, ceases, and the divine 
influence goes on exercising itself in the human 
sphere of direct feeling and intuition, and ex- 
presses itself also in a language that corres- 
ponds to this directness, and is not pervaded by 
the understanding (voi ¢) of the speaker, and is 
therefore unintelligible to the understanding 
(vovc) of the hearers. This sphere of direct 
feeling and intuition the Apostle calls the spirit 
(πνεῦμα) in distinction from the understanding 
(vovc). It is the spirit in the narrower sense 
distinguished from the spirit in a wider sense 
(1 Cor. v. 3; vii. 84; 2 Cor. vii. 1), as feeling 
and especially as directly beholding—a copy as 
it were of the divine Holy Spirit’? ].—He next 
proceeds to draw an inference for the regulation 
of the conduct of the Corinthians in this matter.— 
What then is it?—Some supply πρακτέον, to 
be done, which is unnecessary. [He means, 
‘what is the practical conclusion at which we ar- 
rive?’ This he gives in what follows].—I will 
pray in the spirit,—[On the reading προσεύξω- 
μαι (subjunctive instead of Ind. fut.) which is 
strongly attested by A. Ὁ. E. F. G. and the Cod. 
Sin., ALFrorp remarks: that “the use of the sub- 
junctive in this as well as in other places grew 
out of a tendency in those who transcribed scme 
of our MSS. to give such assertions a hortatory, 
or where interrrogative a deliberative xorm.” 
Meyer calls it ‘‘schlechte Besserung.” It is 
note-worthy that the important Codex Sinaiticus 
has the subjunctive form here, while in the next 
clause it has the indicative future. In this case we 
should take the first as conditional, ‘let me 
pray,’ or, ‘if I am to pray with my spirit, I will 
pray also with my understanding.’ The pro- 
priety of thisis seen in the fact that praying in 
the spirit was not always optional with the indi- 
vidual, nor a matter of resolve. Itcame by gift, 
was the inspiration of the spirit who distributed 
unto each as He would; whereas the use of the 
understanding (vo vc), which combined in itself 
both intelligence and will, was voluntary. It 
seems to be with the perception of this fact that 
Winer, who adopts the future form, says: ‘this 
sentence expresses not a resolution, but a Chris- 
tian maxim which the believer intends to fol- 
low.” ]|—and I will pray with the under- 
standing also ;—By this is meant praying with 
the use of ‘‘interpretation” which would make 
the contents of the prayer intelligible to others, 
and so edifying. It willbe seen from the antithe- 
sis that the ‘‘ understanding” alluded to is that 
of the person praying and not that of others,—as 
though the dative were that of the remote ob- 
ject, g. d., ‘to the understanding of others.’—I 
will sing with the spirit, and I will sing 
with the understanding also.—A proof that 
the prayer was accompanied with song and harp 
also (comp. Osiander). ‘We see here two forms 
of Glossolaly—prayer and praise; it mounted 
therefore into the poetic mood; and there was 
involved in it that which resembled what ap- 
peared later in Christian poesy.’”?’ Neanprer.— 

That these were the main, if not the only forms 
in which this gift was exercised, and very rarely, 
if ever, in discourses to the church-assembly, is 
here pretty clearly proven. Had it been other- 
wise, as Hodge and others maintain,—had the 


‘ 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





person ‘who spoke with a tongue’ undertaken 
to address the audience in his unintelligible lan- 
guage, how much more pertinent to Paul’s argu- 
ment would it have been to show the uselessness 
and absurdity of speaking to others in words un- 
known, than to instance only the cases of pray- 
ing and singing in a foreign tongue. Here the 
words uttered affected the audience only indi- 
rectly, and the speaker might plead that he wag 
engaged with God; but in the other case he 
would profess to be communicating what he 
could not hope to have reach the hearer’s mind 
and heart without interpretation. Here there- 
fore was the point where speaking with tongues 
without interpretation would touch the extreme 
of inappropriateness, and which in the case sup- 
posed Paul would most likely have alluded to. 
As to the distinction between worshiping ‘in 
the spirit” and worshiping ‘in the under- 
standing,” we must abide by the views already 
given. The former denotes the state into which 
the Holy Spirit lifts the person inspired—-a state 
wherein he sees and feels things which it is im- 
possible for him to utter, inasmuch as they 
transcend the scope of his understanding; and 
which break forth in a language that the spirit 
forms, suited to give them utterance; and which 
none can understand and interpret save he to 
whom itis given,—whether it be the person him- 
self or some other one].—The resolve expressed 
in ver. 15, which partakes at the same time of 
the nature of an exhortation, is next cor- 
roborated by a reference to the indecorum that 
would be occasioned by pursuing the opposite 
course.—Hlse,—é wei, for then, in that case; 
[such is the meaning the word takes before 
questions implying a negative (see Ros. Lez.)]. 
Here the conditional clause, which in the use of 
ἐπεὶ 18. usually omitted (comp. v. 10), is fully 
stated.—if thou shalt have blessed,—evAo- 
yeiv, to bless, (x. 16) is essentially the same as 
εὐχαριστεῖν, to give thanks, (v. 17); only here the 
idea of praise is more prominent.—in spirit,— 
as in ver. 15, here with the exclusion of the un- 
derstanding. [Hodge, to maintain his consist- 
ency, interprets this of the Holy Spirit where of 
all places such an interpretation would appear 
least appropriate, since the word is evidently 
used to express an abnormal condition].—how 
shall he who occupies the place of the 
private,—rowv ἰδιώτου; some commentators 
interpret this word as expressing Simply an an- 
tithesis to him ‘who speaks with a tongue,’ as 
denoting one who did not come within the sphere 
of this gift;—just as in other connections, 6. g., 
one not a physician is termed an ἰδιώτης, idiot, in ~ 
comparison with one who is; or one unacquainted 
with art in comparison with an artist; or any 
unskilled ignoramus in comparison with a learned 
person. If now, with Meyer, we interpret the 
word ‘place’ in a local sense, then the person 
in question would be one of the congregation 
who sits anywhere except inthe seat of the 
speaker. But as the phrase, ‘to fill the place 
of a friend’ (φίλου τόπον ἔχειν) is a common one, 
it is questionable whether the idea of locality 
can be well insisted on. More correct perhaps 
would it be to say that the word was expressive 
of a distinction quite current at the time, be- 
tween the active members of the church whe 


CHAP. XIV. 


289 





engaged in speaking and praying, and the silent 
recipient members ; and that it here stands for 
the whole multitude of those who did not under- 
stand the person who was speaking with a tongue. 
[So Alford, Stanley, and Hodge who adds, ‘‘The 
context shows that Paul does not refer to laymen 
in opposition to church officers ; for the officers 
were just as likely to be ἰδιώται, unlearned, as to 
the language used as others.” ]—how shall he 
say—The question implies the impossibility of 
the thing.—the Amen,—r6 ἀμήν; [the arti- 
‘cle here is specific and points to a customary 
use of the word in the church at that time]. 
ἐς Amen” is a Hebrew adjective, meaning true or 
faithful, and was employed in the synagogue by 
the whole assembly in concert to express its ra- 
tification of what was said by one in the name of 
all, or its confidence in being heard if that thing 
spoken was a prayer. The formula thus used 
was equivalent to ‘so let it be,’ or ‘so it is.’ 
[in illustration of the importance attached to it, 
STANLEY gives the following citations from the 
Rabbins: ‘‘ He who says Amen is greater thanhe 
who blesses.” (Berashoth viii. 8). Whoever says 
“. Amen,” to him the gates of paradise open, ac- 
cording to Is. xxvi. 2, ‘open ye the gates that the 
righteous nation, that which keepeth the Amen, 
may enter in’ (Wetstein ad. doc.). An ‘* Amen” if 
not wellconsidered wasan ‘Orphan Amen’ (Light- 
foot ad. loc.). Whoever says an ‘Orphan Amen’ 
his children shall be orphans; whoever answers 
‘Amen’ hastily or shortly, his days shall be short- 
ened; whoeveranswers ‘‘Amen’’ distinctly and 
at length, his days shall belengthened (Berashoth, 
47, 1; Schéttgen ad. loc.). Soin the early Chris- 
tian liturgies it was regarded as a marked point 
in the service; and with this agrees the great so- 
lemnity with which Justin speaks of it, as though 
it were on a level with the thanksgiving: ‘the 
president having given thanks, and the whole 
people having shouted their approbation.’ And 
in later times, the Amen was only repeated once 
by the congregation, and always after the great 
thanksgiving, and with a shout like a peal of 
thunder” ].—upon this your thanksgiving, 
--ἐπὶ TH σῇ εὐχαριστία; the ἐπί here 
denotes immediate sequence. [‘*Thy” would 
seem to be emphatic, to make prominent the 
peculiar manner in which the thanksgiving was 
- pronounced by the one who spoke in an unknown 
tongue, or perhaps still better, to distinguish be- 
tween the prayer offered by such a speaker and 
the regnlar thanksgiving which was pronounced 
at the institution of the Supper. If the latter, it 
would go to show that whatever prayer was of- 
fered by those who employed the gift of tongues 
and interpreted, was responded to by the congre- 
gation as offered also in their behalf; or that 
the Apostle intended to assert that this ought to 
be the case and that in consequence no one 
should utter a prayer in presence of the congre- 
gation which they could not be made to under- 
stand and could not intelligently respond to. It 
is a question whether with this precedent before 
us amounting almost to an authoritative precept, 
60 large a portion of the Christian church have 
not done wrong in entirely omitting so important 
a part of the public service].—since he knows 
not what thou sayest ?—[Men cannot as- 
sent to eee do not understand, because as- 











only with a single tongue. 


sent implies the affirmation of the truth of that 
to which we assent. ‘It is impossible, there- 
fore, to join in prayers uttered in an unknown 
tongue. The Romish church persists in the use | 
of the Latin language in her public services not 
only in opposition to the very ideu and intent 
of worship, but also to express prohibition of 
the Scriptures. For the very thing here pro- 
hibited is praying in public in a language which 
the people do not understand. It is indeed said 
that words may touch the feelings which do not 
convey any distinct notions to the mind. But 
we cannot say ‘‘Amen” to such words, any 
more than we can toa flute. Such blind, emo- 
tional worship, if such it can be called, stands at 
a great remove from the intelligent service de- 
manded by the Apostle.”” HopGE ].—The question 
thus asked is still further explained and that 
too with a concession in reference to the cha- 
racter of the thanksgiving.—For thou indeed 
givest thanks well,—The καλῶς, weil, is not 
to be taken ironically, but is earnestly meant; 
since he regards the act as truly an operation of 
the divine Spirit. The only difficulty in regard 
to it is expressed in the next clause.—but—In- 
stead of déas the antithesis to μέν, we have ἀ λλ 4, 
which expresses a more emphatic contrast.— 
the other—. e., the private person just spoken 
of,—is not edified.— The thanksgiving not 
being understood can never promote devotion, 
nor lift the soul to God; and therefore it cannot 
prompt to theright utterance of theAmen. The 
declaration just made he goes on to confirm by 
his own example; and inso doing he first recog- 
nizes the worth of the gift in itself, and magni- 
fies his own distinguished endowment with it. 
In this way he obviates all misconception as to 
his own estimate of the gift, or as to any per- 
sonal jealousy which might be supposed to move 
him to speak as he did.—I thank God,—He 
thus renounces all claim to merit in reference 
to what he is about to assert of himself. The 
verb here is followed by an objective clause 
which, according to the original reading, has no 
conjunction to unite it,as is often the case in the 
classics. ‘That’?is to be supplied. The read- 
ings ὅτε λαλῶ and λαλῶν are merely different at- 
tempts to conform the text to grammatical rules. 
Theomission of λαλῶ in Cod. A. is to be explained 
on the ground that the copyist thought it neces- 
sary to continue the use of εὐχαριστῶ in the 
same absolute sense in which it stands in ver. 17, 
[i.e ‘Lutter thanksgiving’ just as the person 
before spoken of; and in this independent sense 
some commentators construe the word]. But 
if this sense had been intended, the Apostle would 
not have added the word ‘God.’—I speak 
with a tongue more than you all:—(It is 
worthy of note that, according to the correct 
reading—‘‘a tongue’ and not ‘tongues’—both 
here and elsewhere, when an individualis spoken 
of as endowed with this gift, he is said to speak 
This shows that the 
giftin question did not signify a faculty for speak- 
ing in various languages as some suppose—not 
even in the case of a Paul; but that each one 
had his own language which constituted his 
specialty. Have we not here a significant hint 
in confirmation of the theory that the gift de- 
noted an ability conferred by the Spirit to utter 


290 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





thoughts and feelings awakened by His inspira- 
tion in forms peculiar to the individual himself, 
which might be termed his tongue? Hodge, it 
must be observed, utterly ignores the more au- 
thenticated reading here, and tacitly adopts the re- 
ceived text in proof of the theory that the speak- 
ing with tongues meant speaking in foreign lan- 
guages, in which respect Paul asserts that he 
surpassed all others. If this were really so, it 
is very strange that we find not a particle of evi- 
dence to prove that he really used any of these 
languages in his preaching tours, but every- 
where seems to have spoken and written either in 
Aramaic or in Greek. The gift appears to have 
stood him in no service in proclaiming the Gos- 
pel. If he spoke with these many tongues at all, 
it must have been not to man, but to God—where 
they were the least necessary. For the Apostle’s 
power of speaking with a tongue compare the de- 
scription of his visions and reyelations in 2 Cor. 
xii. 1, 2].—But—whatever I may do in private— 
in church I prefer to speak five words— 
The ‘five’ stands tropically for ‘‘a few” (comp. 
Isa. xvii.6; xxxa17).—with my understand- 
ing,—The reading διὰ τοῦ νοός μου may with 
Meyer be considered as an interpretation of the 
more strongly attested τῶ vot μου. On the 
contrary de Wette deduced it from ver. 16.—in 
order that I might teach others also,— 
κατέχειν, whence our word ‘ catechism,’ means 
to instruct orally, and shows what is meant by 
‘speaking with the understanding,’ and what 
most contributes to edification. —than ten 
thousand words in a tongue.—As Besser 
says: ‘‘rather half of ten, if of the edifying sort, 
than a thousand times ten of the other.” 

_ Vers. 20-25. In winning style he introduces 
an earnest admonition in reference to their own 
estimate of the gift of tongues,—Brethren,— 
and their high valuation of a gift so fitted to ex- 
cite great astonishment, but yet so profitless for 
the church as a whole, he denounces as some- 
thing childish, as. a mark of immature judg- 
ment —become not little children in your 
minds.—raic φρεσίν, [the only occurrence of 
the word in the New Testament]. ¢pévec means 
the outgoings of the mind, the inward movements 
of thoughts and feelings in their most diversified 
aspects. Regarded as a whole, the word is 
nearly synonymous with νοῦς ; hence φρένας ἔχειν, 
to have insight. He here intimates to them that 
by their conduct they were virtually setting aside 
that superior intelligence in which they so much 
gloried, and were descending tothe level of 
childhood; since they were estimating the worth 
of a thing not by its ends and uses, but by its 
outward show. ‘The childlike state belonged to 
the Christian, only in another respect.—how- 
beit in wickedness,—xaxia is the direct op- 
“posite of love, that fountain of all good; and in 
respect to it babes may be considered most inno- 
cent.—be babes,—rvyridlereis from νήπιος 
which denotes a more infantile state than παΐίδιον, 
and is used to denote an advance upon the pre- 
vious expression ‘‘children.” Buraer explains 
the whole to mean: ‘know nothing of the moral 
corruption that is in the world, to say nothing 
of an experimental acquaintance with it.”—but 
in understanding become mature.—r é- 
Accor, t.¢.,full-grownmen. ‘To plant and pro- 








pagate childlike innocence and maturity of under- 
standing both in one—this is the great problem 
of Christianity. (Comp. Rom. xvi, 19; Matt. 
x. 6).” Neanper.—He next appeals to Scrip- 
ture by way of teaching them how they ought to 
regard the gift of tongues.—In the law it is 
written,—yéypanraz, [lit. has been written, 
but inasmuch as what has been written is sup- 
posed to abide permanently the perfect, is here 
equivalent to the present]. The term “law” is 
here to be taken in a broader sense than in John 
x. 34; Rom. iii. 19, as including also the pro- 
phecies. This use is grounded on the fact that 
prophecy was but the development of the funda- 
mental revelation both of law and of promise 
given in Pentateuch.— With (men) of other 
tongues and with the lips of others will 
Ispeak to this people; and neither so 
will they hearken unto me saith the 
Lord.—The citation is from Isa. xxviii 11; 
but it accords precisely neither with the LXX. 
nor with the originaltext. The original passage 
is a threatening pronounced upon the children 
of Israel for their unbelieving and contemptuous 
treatment of God’smessengers. They had asked 
derisively, whether it was thought they ought to 
be treated like little children in that they were 
perpetually dinned with line upon line and pre- 
cept upon precept after the fashion in which 
little children were instructed. In reply God 
threatens that because they had despised this 
simple teaching, He would hereafter instruet 
them through persons of a Leer language 
and foreign utterance. The persons here meant 
were Gentile nations especially the Assyrians, 
by whom they were to be treated just as 
contemptuously as they had treated God’s 
Word.— But how are we to understand the 
application made by the Apostle to the case 
in hand? Meyer, in his 2 Ed., assumes that the 
Apostle here disregarded the historical and em- 
pirical sense of the word ἐτερόγλωσσος, and 
applied it to those who spake with tongues, since 
they spake as if they used other tongues than 
their own, and the lips of others, so that their 
utterances were strange. But this is a very ha- 
zardous assumption. In his 84 Ed. he takes the 
historic sense of the original typically, as though 
the phenomenon of the Apostle’s time was fore- 


shadowed in the prophet’s language:—1. as to © 


the essential fact, that in both cases ‘ other 
tongues’’ were employed; 2. as to the effect, 
since in neither instance ‘‘ would the people 
hear.”’ The analogy between the type and thean- 
titype is founded on the extraordinary phenome- 
non of God’s speaking to His people ina foreign 
tongue—formerly it was through the Assyrian 
language; now it was through the gift of speak- 
ing in a manner at variance with the ordinary 
intelligible language. [Hopae on the contrary, 
and apparently for the purpose of obviating an 
inference fatal to his theory, says: ‘* Paul does 
not quote the passage as having any prophetic 
reference to the events in Corinth ’”’—which cer- 
tainly it has not—‘ much less does he give an 
allegorical interpretation of it in order to make 
it a condemnation of speaking with tongues.” 
But why not? The whole drift of the argument 
goes to show that he is here appealing to the law 
for the purpose of sustaining his own disappro- 


CHAP. XIV. 


291 





val, not indeed of the gift of tongues, in itself, 
but certainly of their use of it without interpre- 
tation; and he is here showing that as they em- 
ployed it they were virtually carrying out that 
divine threatening in relation to the church, 
which was pronounced upon the unbelieving 
Jews of old. There was, therefore, great perti- 
nency in this citation]. From the analogy,-thus 
understood, Paul proceeds to draw his conclusion 
applicable to the case in hand.—so that — 
[ὥςτε serves to connect more closely than ὡς 
a following clause with the preceding, express- 
ing an event, result, consequence, whether real 
or supposed. It here shows that the following 
clause is to be construed in harmony with what 
precedes, and is an inference from it. This is 
important to be observed, for in the interpre- 
tations given of ver. 22, commentators seem to 
have felt at perfect liberty to deviate from the 
fair implication of the prophecy used in the argu- 
ment ]|.—tongues are for a sign, not to be- 
lievers, but to unbelievers ;—[For a sign, 
in what sense? Here interpretations greatly 
vary. De Wette, and Alford, and others insist 
that no emphasis is to be laid on the word, 
and that the meaning is much the same as if it 
were omitted, and still further that in not see- 
ing this commentators have differed widely about 
the meaning]. Others construe it to mean a 
token by which not believers, but unbelievers 
were to be recognized. Here the correct view 
is aimed at, but the error lies in the subjective 
reference, as though the persons speaking with 
tongues were branded as unbelievers. In this 
case the genitive would have been used instead 
of the dative (ἀπίστοις). The same is true of 
that explanation which regards the “sign” asa 
penal token; here a meaning is foisted into the 
word which can hold good only as it stands con- 
nected with unbelievers as a whole. [It cannot 
be maintained in the following clause where ‘a 
sign’ is to be supplied, and the word is used in 
connection with “believers.” Hopes says: ‘‘the 
most satisfactory explanation is to take ‘sign’ 
in the general sense of any indication of the di- 
vine presence. ‘ Tongues are a manifestation of 
God, having reference not to believers but to 
unbelievers.’”” And by interpreting the word 
‘tongues ” as denoting not ‘the gift of tongues,’ 
but ‘foreign languages,’ he draws from the whole 
the meaning, ‘‘that when a people are disobedi- 
ent, God sends them teachers whom they cannot 
understand.” This approaches the correct view. 
But if by ‘‘ unbelievers” we are to understand 
the world at large, it would seem as if the ton- 
gues, 7. ¢., the foreign languages which he sup- 
poses the gift to imply, were especially designed 
for these, and that not in the way of judgment, 
but in the way of instruction. And, so under- 
standing it, we destroy the force of the analogy. 
Hence it will be necessary to restrict the mean- 
ing of the word “unbelievers” as denoting those 
who, having known, refuse to believe—to the 
incorrigible, and to the hardened]. The mean- 
ing, then, is this, that when God speaks unin- 
telligibly, He exhibits Himself not as one that is 
opening His thoughts to His faithful ones, but 
as one who is shutting Himself up from those 
who will not believe. The speaking is indeed a 
powerful one, but nothing is accomplished by 





it; the ear and mind are not directed to Him; 
‘‘neither so will they hearken unto me.” So 
was it formerly in the speaking of God to His 
people by men of other tongues. They, indeed, 
called themselves His, but in this very circum- 
stance they showed that they had incurred His 
judgment. In like manner it also appeared here, 
if a person spake unintelligibly to the church; 
he made it appear asif God had withdrawn from 
His people—as if they, by reason of unbelief, 
had incurred His judgment—as if they were per- 
sons for whom the most powerful divine mani- 
festations—such as speaking with tongues—were 
useless, and who could not be brought by them 
to reflection. [Such would be the effect of em- 
ploying the gift of tongues in the church with- 
out interpretation. And here the force of the 
passage would be all the same whether we in- 
terpreted the gift of tongues as an ability to 
speak in foreign languages, or as the endowment 
of some heretofore unknown formal speech. The 
main thing here, which stands as a sign, is the 
use of language unintelligible to the hearers. 
And this may exist in either case].—but pro- 
phecy (is forasign) not to unbelievers, 
but to believers.—[The E. V. overlooking the 
fact that the two clauses of this verse were alike 
in structure, and stood antithetically, has sup- 
plied the ellipsis by the word ‘“‘ serveth,”’ therein 
following the earlier versions of Tyndale, Cran- 
mer, and Geneva. This somewhat embarrasses 
the interpretation. The two clauses should be 
rendered alike as above. Here ‘ prophecy” 
stands in contrast with the gift of tongues as de- 
noting intelligible communications. Hence, if 
what was spoken by a tongue were only inter- 
preted, it too would stand on a par with pro- 
phecy. This served as a sign not for unbe- 
lievers, but for believers. But in what sense 
are we to understand this? Observing the ana- 
logy furnished in the previous clause, we must 
say that prophecy was a means of divine com- 
munication to those who either did believe, or 
were disposed to believe, and was to them a to- 
ken of favor, and a source of blessing, while it 
was withheld from those hardened in unbelief. 
By such interpretation we both preserve the an- 
tithesis, and carry out the signification of the 
prophecy in Isa., which is here applied ].—Tf, 
then, the whole church should come to- 
gether in one place, and allshould speak 
with tongues, and there should come in 
common people, or unbelievers, would 
they not say, ye were mad ?—[The οὖν 
may be taken either.as strictly inferential, or as 
simply transitional. The latter most accords 
with the course of thought]. It would be a mis- 
take to suppose that what is stated in ver. 22, is 
still further enlarged upon, and explained in this 
and the following verse, by showing the different 
effects of speaking with tongues, and of prophecy 
upon unbelievers and the believing, as though 
these had been already intimated there in a con- 
cise way; as if he had said: ‘tongues are for a 
sign not to believers for the purpose of producing 
faith, but for unbelievers for the purpose of 
strengthening them in their unbelief.’ There is 
a severity of meaning here which ought not to 
be concluded upon, if in any way avoidable. Sa 
also is it a mistake to suppose that the Apostle 


292 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a 





meant to say that the gift of tongues was in- 
tended to be used for the conversion of unbe- 
lievers, 7. e., those not Christians, and that this 
result was hindered by such a use of the gift as 
was contrary to its original intent, it being em- 
‘ployed by Christians collectively (all speaking 
together, and not one by one) and for Christians 
merely, ina style fitted only to be for a sign to 
those who are not Christians, so that in this case 
an effect would be produced upon the minds of 
casual observers directly contrary to that in- 
tended, and the whole phenomenon would be 
made to appear to those common persons and 
unbelievers who might come in to witness this 
abuse, as something exceedingly absurd, and in 
fact a most crazy piece of business (Meyer).— 
The assumption that the gift of tongues was de- 
signed to lead to the conyersiou of those who were 
not Christians, [whether it be as Hodge says, 
through the use of foreign languages which the 
various nations of unbelievers could understand, 
or, as others think, through the remarkable cha- 
racter of the phenomenon itself as an ecstatic 
utterance], is wholly groundless. It is neither 
probable in itself (Acts ii., furnishing no proof 
of this opinion); nor can it be inferred from 
ver. 21, except by a most arbitrary interpreta- 
tion. That passage from Isa. is the announcement 
of a judgment; the prophet there asserts that the 
most powerful speaking on the part of God would 
effect no change upon the people hardened in 
unbelief. So the Apostle argued that in his day 
the speaking with tongues was a sign from God 
to unbelievers, of a like sort—an instrumenta- 
lity in the form of a judgment which, however 
cogent in itself, would produce no salutary re- 
sults. The supposition, therefore, that the gift 
in question was intended as a means of conver- 
sion, is contrary to the line of the Apostle’s argu- 
ment.—Still, in all this no condemnation is at all 
implied of the gift in question, viewed by itself; 
nor are the recipients of the gift in any way dis- 
paraged. Paul is only speaking of the relation 
which the gift sustained to the church, and of 
the absurdity of their using it there without an 
accompanying interpretation. Employed in this 
way, no gracious communication came through it 
from God, as was the case in prophecy; but, ra- 
ther, God appeared as one who shut Himself 
from their apprehension, just as He was wont to 
exhibit Himself towards unbelievers. Accord- 
ingly, we are not to regard the passage before us 
(ver. 23) as designed to show how a gift, which 
was intended to convert unbelievers, had failed 
of its intended effect by a wrong use; but what 
the Apostle aims at here, is to exhibit the pic- 
ture of a church abundantly endowed with the 
gift of tongues, ¢ven to the fullest extent its admi- 
rers would deem desirable, and putting it in fullest 
exercise in its assembly; and then to show the 
impression which such a scene would make on 
casual observers. He imagines ‘the whole 
church convened in one place’-—*‘ a rare occur- 
rence in so large a city,” as Bengel observes, 
yet one calculated to produce a strong impres- 
sion of the solemnity of the occasion), and ‘all 
speaking with tongues’—not necessarily simul- 
taneously [as Stanley supposes] any more than 
in the next verse they are to be regarded as pro- 
phesying together, but one after another—and 


then the coming in of private persons (ἰδιῶται) 

and unbelievers (ἄπιστοι) to watch the proceed- 
ings. What the impression on them must be, he 
leaves for his readers to decide in answering the 
question, ‘‘ would they not say ye were mad ?”— 
an assembly of crazy people rather than a church 
possessed by the Spirit of God? On this point 
there could be no doubt. And here he finds a 
fresh argument for their not employing this gift 
of tongues without interpretation.—yaiveotas 
is not to be interpreted as sometimes in the old 
classic Greek, to be possessed by a god, with the 
additional implication that no one was present 
to explain what those thus possessed were say~ 
ing; but it means, as above, to be mad, as in 
Acts xxvi. 24.—But who are intended by the 
ἰδιῶται πὰ ἄπιστοι who come in to observe 
and take the impression? ΑΒ to the second 
word ἄπιστοι, unbelievers, we are not to under. 
stand it in this and the following verse in the 
same sense which it bears in the one preceding, 
where its meaning is determined by the connec~ 
tion with verse 21, and by the antithesis with 
‘‘those who believe.” Here the import of the 
verse must govern. Such variations in the sig- 
nification of the same word in passages closely 
connected are not without a parallel. A similar 
one occurs in xv. 1, 3, in the use of παραλαβεῖν. 
In the previous case (ver. 22) the word carried 
a strongly ethical force denoting those who 
would not believe; but here, as is evident from 
its being associated with ἰδιώτης, and especially 
from the import of the next verse where it is 
used in the same sense and connection, we must 
understand by it simply those not Christians, 
heathen, it may be, who out of curiosity, or 
from a desire to learn, or by reason of a mys- 
terious longing after truth, might have been in- 
duced to enter the church. But id: @7 az can- 
not in like manner be taken to denote those not 
Christians (whether as Jews, or as persons ap- 
proaching near to Christianity, or as those who 
are perfect strangers to it, nor yet that class 
who were in a transitional state (such as cate- 
chumens and neophytes); but simple laymen or 
common people in distinction from those who 
spoke with tongues or prophesied; or even per- 
haps Christians from abroad since it is pre- 
supposed that the whole church belonging to that 
locality were in the assembly. [The meaning’ 
here given to ἰδιώτης is its primary one, implied 
in the root ἴδιος; but the rendering unlearned is 
in accordance with its secondary signification, 

and is adopted by all who hold to the theory 
that ‘*the tongues” employed were foreign lan- 
guages. Hence Hope® says in reference to the 
distinction between the words in question :— 
‘‘The two classes (the unlearned and the unbe- 

lieving) are not so distinguished that the same 

person might not belong to both classes. The 

same persons were either ἰδιῶται or ἀπίστοι, ac- 

cording to the aspect under which they were 

viewed. Viewed in relation to the languages, 

they were unlearned; viewed in relation to 

Christianity, they were unbelievers.” This is 

consistent with the general theory, but can 

hardly be admitted.—The superiority and so the 

greater desirableness of prophecy is next shown 

by way of contrast in the effect it would be 

likely to produce under the same circumstances.— 


CHAP. 


_ 


But if all prophesy,—Here let it be remem- 
bered that ‘‘prophecy” not only implies the use 
of the vernacular and the exercise of the νοῦς, 
the understanding, but was also a disclosure of 
the hidden things of the spiritual world whether 
in God or man—not simply a prediction of fu- 
ture events].—and there should come in 
some unbeliever or private person,—dAs 
in the former case, a full meeting of the church 
is here presupposed to enhance the impression 
made. Observe also a change in the order of 
the words and of the number in which they are 
introduced. As Mryer says: 1. ‘‘In the former 
instance common persons are mentioned first, and 
unbelievers afterwards, since the common persons 
being Christians and supposed to be acquainted 
with the object of the gift, naturally step into 
the foregrouna, and the opinion expressed would 
fall from them first; on the contrary here ‘‘the 
unbeliever” appears first, because he is speak- 
ing of conversion, and therefore he is the one 
principally intended ; the other party is added 
by the way, inasmuch as his case is not alto- 
gether dissimilar.” Brnaen: 2. ‘In the former 
case we have the plural, where the aim is to set 
forth a general impression which was to be 
made and expressed—one speaking to another; 
with equal suitableness the singular appears in. 
the second case, where the aim is to exhibit a con- 
verting effect in its progress, which can best be 
shown in the instance of a particular indivi- 
dual.” —he is convicted by all,—étéyyeraz, 
is made conscious of his sin andunbelief. The secret 
movements of his heart—concealed more or less 
from the subject himself—are exposed in so strik- 
ing a manner by the speakers as one after 
another goes on prophesying and deepening the 
impression, that the individual feels himself to 
be one pointed at, is compelled to see himself in 
his true light, and at last is forced to confess the 
correctness of the delineation.—is judged by 
all:—avakpivetau, is examined and searched 
into; this is closely connected with the preced- 
ing. The conviction brings with it a judgment 
on the man’s moral character. He hears it 
already pronounced in the speeches he listens to, 
and conscience compels him to accord therewith, 
and acknowledge its propriety.—the secret 
things of his heart become manifest ;— 
There is no further chance for disguise. The 
revelation scatters all darkness and solves all 
doubt. The three verbs and their relation to 
each other are more fully explained by Osiander: 
ἐλέγχειν expresses the inner conviction and re- 
proof—this is the whole work; dvaxpivera the 
more searching investigation, as it were the in- 
ward trial—this is the chief instrumentality ; 
φανερὰ yiv., thedisclosure of what is within that 
sets all at rest,—this is the result. Or we have 
here codrdination and gradation: 1. the first 
strong, but yet general impression of the truth, 
the sentence passed through it; 2. its develop- 
ment,—the investigation and judgment of the 
individual, or besides, the refutation of his re- 
ply to the charge; 3. the advance to the in- 
terior, the centre of the moral life, where each 
particular is set in full light and the trial reaches 
its consummation. Allis as one inward revela- 
tion, designed especially to overcome the per- 
son’s unbelief; mediated by the power of divine | 














XIV. 298 


truth which spoke inspiringly through the 
mouth of the prophets, and by the force of his 
own moral consciousness as apprehended by the 
truth and strengthened through the depth of his 
own inward experience and through the abund- 
ant outpouring of the Holy Spirit. It is doubt- 
ful whether there may not also have been search- 
ing glances, as of aseer, into significant circum- 
stances of the inward moral lite of the unsatis- 
fied one (Grot.)—and so—i. 6., in consequence 
of this conviction,—falling upon his face, he 
will worship God,—[*‘: Comp. the effect of 
Samuel’s prophesying on Saul, ‘‘ He lay down all 
that day and night. 1Sam. xix. 24.” STaniey |].— 
reporting—a7tayyéAAwr, a plain emphatic 
avowal, suitable to the mighty impression made; 
and what is reported is directly the reverse of 
their being mad.—that God is in you—{[not, 
‘among you,’ but in your minds working there 
‘this inward illumination and spiritual power,— 
a most conclusive argument in favor of religion 
from the divine operations.” Brnern. ‘lt is 
through this in-dwelling of God in the indivi- 
duals through His Spirit, that He dwells in the 
church as a whole, which thereby becomes His 
Temple.” Meyer]. See fora like effect the con- 
fession of the woman of Samaria, Jno. iv. 19.— 
of a truth.—értwe appears also in Mark xi. 82, 

Vers. 26-33, From what has been said he pro- 
ceeds to draw some practical lessons for regu- 
lating the use of spiritual gifts in the church.— 
What is it, then, brethren ?—rTi οὖν ἐστιν, 
as in ver. 16. [‘‘It is a conclusive phrase, intro- 
duced at the end of discussion, the sense of which 
is always nearly the same, but which requires to 
be accommodated to the context.” BLoomrieLp. 
lis meaning here, then, is not, ‘‘ what is then the 
condition of things among you? How, in point 
of fact, do you conduct your public worship?” 
(Hodge), as though about to introduce a descrip- 
tion of a state of things he was about to disap- 
prove. But it means ‘what, then, is the infer- 
ence to be drawn from what I have said? What, 
then, is to be done?’—The clauses which follow 
have beca variously interpreted. Some like , 
Locke, Doddr., Stanley, Hodge, regard Paul as 
here exposing a state of'things which needed to 
be corrected. They lay stress upon the use of 


the present tense, as though intended to exhibit 


the eager haste of the parties endowed with 
gifts to exercise these gifts in unseemly haste 
and forwardness. This, however, would be to 
foist into the words a meaning or a force which 
does not readily appear, and which seems un- 
necessary. All we can fairly find there is] a 
statement of the case in a protasis and apodosis, 
[in view of which he lays down the rule he wished 
to enforce ].—when ye come together,—{i.e., 
‘as often as ye come together’ (Meyer, Hodge) ]. 
—every one of you—The ἕκαστος must be 
understood of those endowed twith spiritual gifts, 
and be interpreted distributively—not that every 
one has all the gifts about to be enumerated, but 
that each one has something—one this and an- 
other that.—has—as ready for communication. 
[Locke adds: ‘so that he is not able to endure 
any delay.” But this is an unnecessary intensi- 
fication of the present].—a psalm,—[not one 
taken from the book of Psalms, as though none 
other were allowed to be used in publi¢ wor- 


294 





ship, as some of our Scotch brethren imagine], 
nor one previously composed and committed for 
the occasion; but the meaning is, that he comes 
to church in a state of mind inspired by the Spi- 
rit, to produce and pour forth some song of praise 
[after the manner of Miriam, Deborah, Simeon]. 
Inasmuch as having a tongue is particularly 
mentioned afterwards, we are not here to un- 
derstand a song in the spirit, ἡ, e., with a tongue, 
as in ver. 15.—has a doctrine,—i. 6.) is ready 
to give an exposition of some particular portion 
of Christian truth.—has a revelation,—~. e., 
some disclosure from the unseen world, which 
forms a basis of prophecy which some take as 
synonymous with this.—has a tongue,—. ¢., 
has the inspiration on him to speak with a tongue. 
—has an interpretation.—i. ¢., the qualifica- 
tioa to interpret what is spoken with a tongue. 
[Some would end the apodosis here; but, as DE 
Werre well says: ‘‘ The reader cannot well stop 
here, but is forced on by the opening question 
to the concluding thoug!t which follows, and 
which forms, as it were, a second apodosis’’]. 
Let all things happen to edification.— 
[7. 6... ‘let all these gifts be so employed and timed 
that the whole church shall be built up and per- 
fected thereby; and let no one seek to employ 
them either for his own private edification, or for 
his own glory.’ This is a general rule which he 
lays down for the regulation of all their public 
services], and which he now goes on to apply 
more particularly in relation to glossolaly, and 
to prophecy. — Whether any one speaks 
with a tongue,—The cite, whether, which in- 
troduces the first instance, has no ‘‘ or” corres- 
ponding to it in the second—an anacoluthon 
which arises from the manner in which he car- 
ries out his instructions in regard to the former.— 
by twos, or, at most, by threes,—The plu- 
ral refers back to what is implied in the previous 
clause, i. ¢., ‘if there are any speakers with 
tongues.’ Hence we are to supply the verb, ‘let 
them speak.’ We can also take this as declara- 
tive (with de Wette and Meyer): ‘In case a per- 
* son wishes to speak with a tongue, let him know 
that two or three ought to speak, 7. 6., not more 
than two to three in one and the same assembly.’ 

‘‘'This limitation implies that there had been a 
danger lest the whole assembly should be en- 
grossed by them,” Srantey; and thus the time 
be spent in the use of this the least useful of all 
the gifts]—and in turn ;—This is the second 
direction instructing them not to speak at once— 
a thing they might be disposed to do in the glow 
of their inspiration—but one after the other. A 
third direction is,—and let one interpret.— 
Not ‘one after the other,’ for this is contrary to 
the usage of the language; but one who has 
the gift of interpretation, whether it be one of 
those who speak with a tongue, or some other 
person. By the employment of only one person to 
interpret the discourses of the successive speak- 
ers, time would be gained for other discourses. 
According to Osiander, this direction may have 
been grounded in the fact that the fulness and 
manifoldness of the creative power of the Spirit 
manifested itself in this productive charism in a 
rich variety of forms, and in an inspiration that 
wrought in many individuals; while the repro- 
ductive charism of interpretation referred back 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— 


the variety of form to the unity of the Spirit, 
and the tundamental contents of that spoken; 
and also in the fact that the gift of the Spirit 
made itself known much more powerfully if one 
person interpreted several tongues. Whether 
the composition of the verb διερμηνεύειν is to be 
pressed, as Osiander thinks, so as to make it 
mean an exact interpretation extending to all 
points, is doubtful.—But if there be not an 
interpreter,—i. ¢., either in the person of him 
who speaks with tongues, or of any other,—let 
him keep silence in church ;—Here there 
is a change of subject. It is not the interpreter 
that is to keep silence,’but the person who has 
a tongue; as is evident from the context. If we 
assume that the latter person is meant in both 
clauses, as though the first read, ‘but if he be 
not an interpreter,’ then it would be supposed 
that interpretation was exclusively the gift of 
one who spake with tongues, which is contrary 
to xii. 10. [‘*The gift of tongues and the in- 
terpretation of them appear to have been usually 
imparted to separate persons, for thereby the 
power of the Spirit was more conspicuously ma- 
nifested; but it seems too much to say that these 
gifts were invariably distinct.’ Quoted from 
Slade by Bloomfield, who goes on to say: ‘‘Cer- 
tainly the present passage does not compel us to 
suppose they were distinct. For the Apostle’s 
injunction might only be given on the supposi- 
tion that the person had, as in ordinary cases, 
the gift of tongues without the power of inter- 
pretation. But the phrase in question no more 
precludes the possibility of a person being his 
own interpreter, than the phrases in wv. 5 and 
13 preclude the possibility of interpretation by 
others ’’].—But though compelled to keep si- 
lence in church, his gift need not be wholly sup- 
pressed.—but let him speak to himself and 
to God.—That this cannot be explained of an 
inaudible, or altogether mental communication, 
is refuted by the verb λαλεῖν, which always 
denotes loud utterance. The thing here meant 
must therefore be private devotion at home. The 
datives here ἑαυτῷ---τ ᾧ Ue are not dat. com- 
modi, as though they meant ‘for his own im- 
provement, and for the glory of God;’ but they 
are to be rendered either ‘to himself,’ and ‘to 
God,’ or ‘for himself,’ and ‘for God.’ The whole 
injunction presupposes that the person who spoke ~ 
with a tongue was master of himself, and not 
entirely overruled by an irresistible impulse; 
also, that he knew for himself what he felt and 
uttered (comp. on vv. 2, 14).—[But if ‘the 
tongue” was some foreign language, why should 
he speak ‘‘to himself, and to God” in it, when in 
all probability it was not half so suitable a vehi- 
cle for uttering religious thought as the Hebrew 
or Greek? and not reserve it till he found some 
foreigner who could readily understand him 
without an interpreter? On the condition sup- 
posed, the latter would be the more natural 
course to be pursued].—An analogous direction 
he gives in regard to the prophets.—And let the 
prophets speak two or three,—i. ¢., in one 
meeting. Opportunity would thus be given for 
other edifying discourses, such as doctrine.— 
[ He does not add ‘at most,” because he does not 
wish to appear as if limiting this most edifying 
of the gifts. A trorp]—And as in the former 


CHAP. XIV. 


—_ 


case interpretation was to be used, so here judg- 
ment.—and let the others discern.—~. ¢., 
judge what in the discourse proceeds from the 
Spirit of God, or from a foreign spirit (Neander 
and Burger). By ‘the others” we most natu- 
rally understand the rest of those possessed of 
the gift of prophecy who are not discoursing, 
who possessed also the gift of discernment; not 
members of the church generally, since all could 
not be regarded as qualified for this; nor yet 
such as possessed the gift of judgment without 
that of prophecy, although there must have been 
persons of this class likewise. [The original 
subject ‘* prophets” here runs through the whole 
sentence ].—In what follows the duty of speaking 
in turn is still further insisted upon. And first 
we have the precept itself—And if anything 
be revealed to another sitting by,—and 
thereupon his spirit was moved to prophesy, 
then—let the first be silent—and sit down; 
for the speaker stood (comp. Luke iv. 17). ‘‘The 
fact that the Spirit impelled another to speak 
was a hint to the first speaker that it was time 
for him to be done.” Buraer. [‘ It was of 
more importance to catch the first burst of a 
prophecy than to listen to the completion of one 
already begun.” SranitEy. But this would im- 
ply that an inspired discourse reversed the 
order of ordinary discourse where the perora- 
tion is generally the most eloquent part]. By 
this injunction the Apostle does not intend that 
the second speaker should wait until the first had 
finished [ Hodge*], but that in case he gives some 
token, perhaps by rising, that he has received a 
revelation and wishes to speak immediately, the 
first should not then prolong his speech, but 
should give way to the first gush of inspiration 
in the other, although perhaps not so as to break 
off too abruptly. ; Besides, the revelation is not 
to be regarded precisely in the light of a new 
disclosure occasioned by the speech just heard ; 
although, as a general thing, a susceptibility for 
further revelations would be awakened and 
furthered by the prophetic discourse of another. 
The injunction just given is next sustained by 
offsetting to the disinclination to restrain the 
impulse to speak the thought that, while avoid- 
ing the confusion occasioned by several speaking 
at once, the opportunity might thus be afforded 
for all to exercise their gift; and he encourages 
them to the exercise of self-denial in this re- 
spect by pointing them to the result which would 
thereby be attained.—For one by one—He 
here takes up again the import of the injunc- 
tion just given, laying a stress thereupon, as well 
as upon the word “all” which follows.—ye 
can all prophesy,—the possibility here im- 
plied is simply an outward one, that of an oppor- 
tunity to express themselves if not in one meet- 
ing yet, at least, in several subsequent ones (and 
also, perhaps, to finish out what was left unsaid 





*[“ Two reasons may be urged for this view. The inter- 
ruption of aspeaker was itself disorderly, and therefore con- 
trary to the whole drift of the Apostle’s directions; and 
secondly, what follows is most naturally understood as as- 
signing the reason why thereceiver of the first revelation 
snould wait.’ Hopee. The strongest objection to these 
reasons is the force of the imperative ovydtw, let him be, not 
become, silent. ] 

ἡ [Did not the Apostle also intend here to suggest a con- 
yenient way by which tedious and long-winded speakers 
could have a period put to their too protracted harangues ?] 





298 





when they were compelled to be silent). A sim. 
pler explanation than this which properly sub- 
audits mpogyrevovec after κα ϑ᾽ Eva, is that which 
emphasizes δύνασ ϑ ε πα κα ϑ᾽ ἕνα, gq. d.,‘ you 
can indeed all individually prophesy; there is 
nothing to withhold you from it forcibly.’ [So 
ALFORD, who explains it, ‘‘you have power to 
bring about this result—you can be silent if you 
please, and so prophesy one by one.’’]—The 
result of thus bringing the prophetic gift into 
full exercise would be that all the members of 
the church would find nourishment and satisfac- 
tion for all their intellectual and moral wants— 
a result that could not be obtained in case sey- 
eral spoke at once.—that all may learn, and 
all may be exhorted (or comforted).—Ac- 
cording to the first of the interpretations given 
above, this result would be reached by the fact 
that all had had the opportunity of speaking. 
[‘‘The discourse of one might suit the wants of 
some hearers; and that of another might be 
adapted to the case of others. Thus all hear- 
ers would receive instruction and consolation.” 
Hover]. Besides, the second πάντες, all, may 
possibly include also those prephets not pre- 
cisely active. [Was their comfort to consist in 
the chance for speaking, or in the opportunity 
of hearing others?] To think of these exclu- 
sively is inconsistent with the change of persons, 
‘ye may prophesy,’ ‘all may learn’ (μανϑάνω- 
ow).—In yer. 32 he proceeds to show that the 
nature of prophetic inspiration did not hinder 
the maintenance of such order, but rather pro- 
moted it. His meaning is 1. ‘ye are able to do 
this ;’ 2. ‘it becometh you also as prophets to do 
this by virtue of the character of your gift.’ 
This character is thus set forth,— And the 
spirits of the prophets are subject to the 
prophets.—The “and” connects this verse to 
the preceding as containing an additional rea- 
son for the injunction givenabove. In regardto 
the expression ‘‘the spirits of the prophets,” 
it is a question whether he means the inspiring 
Spirit, in the variety of its manifestations 
[Hodge, de Wette and others], or, the inspired 
spirits of prophets themselves which, because he 
is here speaking of prophets in general, are na- 
turally put in the plural [Meyer, Alford, Stan- 
ley]. The latter interpretation is the more 
probable as is seen by the drift of the argument 
since the statement that the spirits are subject 
to the prophets would hardly be suitable on such 
a construction. The meaning ‘inward motions,’ 
‘excitements,’ ‘inspirations’ [Wordsworth] can- 
not be admitted. But who are the prophets to 
whom the spirits are subject? Some understand 
by these other prophets, and interpret the verb 
ὑποτάσσεται of that mutual subordination 
which is implied in the silencing of the one by 
the rising of another ; or, according to Bengel, 
in the learning of the person silenced; er, ac- 
cording to others, in the subjection to the ‘dis- 
cernment’ exercised over them by otlrers—which 
howeveris toofarfetched. Others understand by 
these prophets the individualsto whom the spirits 
belonged; so that the expression ‘‘to the pro- 
phets” would be equivalent ‘to themselves,’ only 
being more emphatic and pointing, as it were, 
to the circumstance that this subjection was 
grounded in the very essence of the gift itself 


296 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





The ‘subjection’ he speaks of is that which is 
involved in a sound Christian disposition and ac- 
cords with the true prophetic spirit.—In the 
first explanation, viz, that which supposes the 
subjection to be to other prophets, the reference 
to the injunction ‘‘let him be silent,” as that 
about which he is treating, is the only correct 
one, g.d., ‘let him be silent inasmuch as the 
spirit of one prophetis subject tothat of another ;’ 
neither can we say wi ἢ Meyer, that that injune- 
tion would have been superfluous in this case; 
since indeed it is only confirmed by pointing to 
that which is becoming to the Christian prophet 
as such. But the second interpretation deserves 
the preference as the finer one, qg. d., ‘‘ye are 
able all of you, by restraining your impulse to 
sperk, to prophesy one after another; and such 
control over the spirit, however powerfully ex- 
cited, belongs to the prophets themselves who 
are no mere enthusiasts obeying their own im- 
pulses involuntarily, but voluntary agents.” [In 
this way he distinguishes these impulses from 
those of the heathen pythonesses and sibyls.” 
Sranuey]. The absence of the article before 
πνεύματα προφητῶν προφήταις is ac- 
counted for by the fact that these words are 
used qualitatively. [It generalizes the asser- 
tion making it applicable to all Christian pro- 
phets].—The position thus taken is still further 
substantiated theologically by a reference to God 
whose Spirit is the active principle of prophecy.— 
For God is not of confusion, but of peace. 
—By not maintaining this control over their spi- 
rits, they would appear as not true prophets 
moved by the Spirit of God; since by allowing 
their impulse to speak in an unbridled way, there 
would arise a state of things that could not pos- 
sibly come from God, viz., disorder; that peace 
which is essentially God’s work would be broken 
up. ἀκαταστασία (30Oor. xii. 20; Jas. iii. 16; 
Luke xxi. 9) is disorder, confusion, which also in- 
volves disunion; hence the antithesis εἰρήνη 
in which order and subordination are implied. 
These are put in the genitive, as indicating both 
what belongs to God as an attribute, and what 
proceeds from Him as an effect. God is not a 
being who either has in Himself or produces 
confusion ; but who both has and produces peace 
(comp. the genitives Heb. x. 39 and the ex- 
pression ‘‘the God of Peace” Rom. xv. 83),— 
Here some commentators directly annex the 
clause —as in all the churches of the 
saints.—[So likewise the E. V.]. In this case 
something must be supplied in order to put it in 
relation to the altogether general proposition 
just laid down. For example, ‘God is such a 
being among you asin all the churches of the 
saints.’ ‘This His character must. show itself 
among you, just as in all the churches, through 
this subjection I am speaking of.’ But whether 
we effect the connection in this or in some other 
way, there will nevertheless always remain in 
it something peculiar and harsh. Whereas, on 
the contrary, what is said in opposition to unit- 
ing it with what follows, viz., that Paul elsewhere 
does not use a protasis with ὡς, without follow- 
ing it with a οὕτως, and that the word ‘churches’ 
would occur close together with diverse signifi- 
cations, ought to be of little weight; to this it 
may be added that afterward, in ver. 86, there 








occurs a reprimand founded thereupon. [‘I am 

compelled,” says ALForp, ‘to depart from the 
majority of modern critics of note, 6. g., Lach’ 

mann, Tischendorf, Billroth, Meyer, de Wette, 

and to adhere to the common arrangement of 

this latter clause. My reason is, that taken as 
beginning the next paragraph, it is harsh be- 
yond example, and superfluous, as anticipating 
the reason about to be given ob yap x. τ. Δ. Be- 
sides which, it is more in accordance with St. 

Paul’s style, to place the main subject of a new 
sentence first, see 1 Tim. iii. 8, 11, 12; and we 
have an example of reference to general usage 
coming in last, in aid of other considerations, 

ch. xi. 16; but it seems unnatural that it should 
be placed first in the very forefront of a matter 
on which he has so much to say.” To this it may 
be added that the clause standing where it does 
in the E. V., as connected with what precedes, 

seems to furnish a demonstration of the general 
position assumed and especially of the conclud- 
ingassertion. The peace and the order which he- 
longs to God and comes from God, might be seen 
manifested in all the churches of the saints, and 
ought therefore to have been manifest at Corinth 
in like manner. Hodge and Wordsworth follow 
the old punctuation without comment. So like- 
wise does Bloomfield who however takes the 
words, ‘for God is not, efe.,” as parenthetical ; 

and in the words, ‘‘as in all, etc.,”” he would un- 
derstand the law, viz., ‘‘ for the prophets to have 
in subjection the spiritual influence for good.” © 
As to the new punctuation, ἢ» adds: ‘it occa- 
sions a very offensive tautology, and derogates 
much from the weight and gravity with which 
the direction is brought forward.” But see be- 
low. ‘ 

Vers. 34-36. This little paragraph, prohibiting 
women from speaking in public assemblies, forms 
an adjunct to the precepts in vy. 26-33, and 
its connection with these would be still closer, if 
we suppose Paul to have had in mind such wo- 
men as had the gift of prophecy (comp. Acts xxi. 
9), or of tongues. Both Greek and Roman as 
wellas Jewish custom forbade the public ap- 
pearance of women (comp. Grot. and Wests. i. 
h. 1). Christian church order attached itself to 
this custom (1 Tim. ii. 11), suitably to the old di- 
vine order (νόμος, Gen, ili. 16) which strictly im- 
posed upon woman subjection to man, since she, 
by her voluntary act, had involved him in apos- 
tasy. To this belongs the duty of keeping si- 
lence in public assemblies; while public speaking, 
whether in the way of holding discourse, or of 
asking questions, appeared, on the contrary, as 
an effort at independence calculated to foster 
woman’s vanity, and to take her out of the sub- 
ordinate position appointed her by God. Even 
in the matter of putting questions, this was the 
more true in proportion as the question was keen 
and pert. Aside from this, also, it involved a 
sort of intercourse with men on the part of the 
women, and a renunciation of their dependenea 
upon their husbands, from whom, or through 
whose aid they ougkt to obtain the knowledge 
they were in quest of—a matter important for 
preserving the integrity of the marriage relation; 
while, on the other hand, this holding direct 
communication with other men in public assem- 
blies, even on spiritual subjects, might serve to 


CHAP. XIV. 


297 


--- τ τ΄..ο΄----᾽ ’---κ-  -»-ςςςςς-ς-ς-ςς------Ὃ-------ς-ς-ς-ς-ς-ςς-ς-ςς.ς-.ς-ς------ς---Ὁ--Ἶς-ςςςς-.ς-ς-ς-ς-ςς.- 


disturb it.—Unmarried women are here not taken 
into the account. That these had more freedom 
than the married, cannot be inferred from Acts 
xxi. 2, since nothing is there said of public pro- 
phesying. In thcm a modest less-restraint is 
naturally presupposed. Their desirefor know- 
ledge might also be gratified in other quiet ways, 
e.g., through their fathers, relatives, friends, 
teachers, deaconesses, etc. The same held good 
of the converted wives of the heathen.—As in all 
churches of the saints.—[On the connection 
ef this clause see above. As Stantey: ‘“'l hough 
in the older texts joined to the preceding, it has 
since the time of Cajetan, and rightly, been 
joined to the following, the connection being the 
same as in xi. 16'’]. These words stand first by 
way of emphasis, in order to cut off all objec- 
tions in advance. Nothing here needs to be sup- 
plied, since from the context we readily under- 
stand it to be meant ‘as the women keep silence 
in the churches.’ [The early Greek fathers, the 
Vulgate, Wickliffe, Cranmer, and the Rheims’ 
yersion, who all connect this clause with the 
preceding, subaudit ‘I teach,’ apparently, to ob- 
viate the otherwise natural, but hardly allowable 
inference, that the Apostle was appealing to the 
condition of things in other churches to prove a 
conceded and undeniable truth, that God was a 
God of peace and of order. The necessity felt 
for supplying some such expression to render 
the sense pertinent in such a connection, is a 
strong argument in favor of the other punctua- 
tion here advocated]. Therév ἁγίων belongs 
toév ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις (comp. ἅγιοι i. 2) and 
serves to add force to the reference. That which 
obtains in the churches of persons consecrated 
to God, ὦ. ¢., of the saints, is more than an ordi- 
nary human custom; it is a higher divine ordi- 
nance which must be ascribed to the Spirit of 
God ruling in them.—let the women keep 
silence in the churches ;—To connect τῶν 
a@yiov, as Lachmann does with what follows, 
omitting ὑμῶν as though it were ‘let the wives of 
the saints,’ efc., is too forced, and is not de- 
manded by the, somewhat emphatic expression 
ἐς their own husbands,” in ver. 35. If we main- 
tain the reading ὑμῶν, your, an antithesis would be 
implied therein between the special designation 
of ‘* women,” and the more general mention of 
‘‘all the churches.” This, however, does not 
well suit, since the emphasislies upon the word 
‘“‘women.”” Paul does not intend to say that 
their women, in distinction from all others, were 
to keep silence in the churches; but the point 
made is in reference to women in general.—It is 
a question, however, whether ‘‘your” may not 
be put in relation to ‘‘ churches,” and then, also, 
the word “churches” in the protasis be under- 
stood only of the assemblies.—The prohibition is 
confirmed by a reference to the established order 
in this respect.—for it is not permitted unto 
them to speak:—of course it is public speak- 
ing that is here intended as the context implies. 
[‘‘In the O. T. it had been predicted that ‘your 
sons and your daughters shall prophesy ;’ a pre- 
diction which the Apostle Peter quotes as verified 
on the day of Pentecost, Acts ii. 17; and in Acts 
xxi. 9 mention is made of four daughters of 
Philip who prophesied. The Apostle himself 
seems to take for granted in xi. 5, that women 








might receive and exercise the gift of prophecy. 
It is therefore only the public exercise of the 
gift that is prohibited.”” Hopgre]. Inasmuch as 
in such public speaking there would be mani- 
fested a certain degree of social independence, 
we see the propriety of his putting in contrast 
with this,—but to be under obedience,—We 
here have an instance of brachylogy. Comp. 1 
Tim. iv. 8, Instead of ‘it is not permitted,” we 
must here supply some expression corresponding 
with the second clause, such as ‘it is commanded 
them,’ or ‘it isincumbent onthem.’ The varia- 
tion ὑποτασσέσϑωσαν, let them keep silence, though 
apparently well sustained, was no deubt intended 
as a grammatical correction through ignorance 
of the above construction.—as also saith the 
law. [See Gen. iii. 16, ‘‘and he shall rule over 
thee;” also Numb. xxx. 3-12. The speaking of 
women was also strictly forbidden in the Syna- 
gogues|.—But if they wish to learn any- 
thing,—[a thing most certainly to be antici- 
pated in quick, sensitive, eager natures; and 
which, to repress altogether, would be both in- 
jurious and painful, and was therefore to be pro- 
vided for, yet, in consistency with that refine- 
ment and delicacy which is the beauty and the 
glory of the sex].—let them ask their own 
husbands at home ;—‘* This is on the suppo- 
sition that their husbands were’ Christians,” 
BurcEer; [and were able to answer them. Their 
incapacity in this respect is either passed over 
as not to be supposed, or as an evil which was 
remediless]. The verb ἐπερωτᾷν generally means 
to enquire, and is not to be taken as expressing 
a ‘desire to hear yet more in addition to that 
which they had heard in the church.” OsIANDER. 
[‘*Their own” (ἰδίους) is emphatic, confining 
them to their own husbands to the exclusion of 
other men]. The teachings of the law he shows 
to be sustained by the public sense of propriety. 
—for itis a shame for women to speak in 
the church.—[‘‘ The word used is αἰσχρός, 
which properly means ugly, deformed. Τὶ isthe pre- 
dicate of anything which excites disgust. As tha 
peculiar power and usefulness of women depend 
on their being the objects of admiration and af- 
fection, anything which tends to excite the op- 
posite sentiments should, for that reason, be 
avoided.” Hopcr]. Any objection that might 
possibly be raised against what was thus 
founded upon the general custum and order of 
the churches, he encounters with a question.—Or 
went the word of God out from you? or 
came it unto you only ?—7. 6., ‘are you the 
original church, so that your wisdom is to set 
the standard of propriety; or are you the only 
church, so that you are at liberty to stand alone 
by yourselves and your own conceits?’ This 
question which so plainly exhibits the imperti- 
nence of any opposition on the part of the Co- 
rinthians, cannot be put in relation to the fore- 
going precepts (ver. 26 ff.), but only to the shame- 
fulness of the conduct in question just spoken 
of. This is required by the close grammatical 
connection, g. d, ‘this public speaking is in 
violation of the public sense of decency; or, are 
you the original or the only church of Christ?’ 
ἢ. €., you can oppose this only on the ground that 
you are such, so that either all the other churches 
must conform their regulations to yours as the 


298 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ss A ee 


mother-church, or you, as the sole depositaries 
of the revelation of God, are at liberty to set 
yourselves up as the only rule of what is be- 
coming. Now, since this was not the case, it 
was incumbent on them, as a part of a commu- 
nity of churches of Christ, to put themselves in 
agreement with the rest in regard to their rules 
of divine worship.—lIn respect to the language of 
the text comp. Isa. 11. ὃ; Micah iv. 2.—‘ The 
word of God” here means Christian doctrine as 
being preéminently the revelation of God (2 
Cor. ii. 17; 1 Thes. i. 8). 

Vers. 37-40. These verses form the conclusion 
to the whole discussion concerning spiritual gifts 
and their use. He here sets himself against all 
such spiritual presumption as would exalt the 
impulse of the free spirit above apostolic pre- 
cepts, and affirms that the person who recognizes 
what has just been written to be a precept rest- 
ing upon the authority of Christ, indicates 
thereby the reality of his own inspiration, so 
that in the opposite case all claim to such inspi- 
ration would prove itself to be but a vain fancy. 
This is what the word δοκεῖ points to in what 
follows, which here, as in xi. 12, does not mean 
‘appear,’ but think, involving a possibility of 
self-deception.—If any man think himself 
to be a prophet, or spiritual, — In conse- 
quence of the disjunctive ‘or,’ many take the 
word ‘‘spiritual” ina restricted sense as denoting 
one speaking with tongues. [So Stanley]; but 
7, or, is equivalent both to and, as well as to vel., 
ὦ. €., it serves to separate ideas which might be 
taken for one another as well as those which 
exclude one another (Passow. I 13820). Ac- 
cordingly the term “spiritual” might designate 
the genus, under which ‘the prophet” might be 
included, denoting any one endowed with the 
spirit, and implying therefore the possession of 
any other gift which together with prophecy 
belongs to this class, and certainly not the gift 
of tongues exclusively.—let him acknowl- 
edge what things I write to you, that— 
ἐπιγινωσκέτω ἃ γράφωου--ὔτι, a case of 
well known attraction for ὅτε ἃ γράφω, ἐ. 6., ‘let 
him acknowledge that the things which I write 
to you.’ [But what are the prescripts referred 
to? those in the verses just preceding ? or tothe 
whole contents of this chapter? Plainly the 
latter, as may be seen from the characters speci- 
fied—‘ prophet’ and ‘spiritual person’ which 
show that he had in mind all the regulations 
given in relation to the exercise of spiritual 
gifts].—they are the (commandments) of 
the Lord.—There are various readings here; 
the most probable is κυρίου ἐστίν, ‘are of the 
Lord.’ To this there was then added as a gloss 
ἐντολή, ‘commandment,’ which then crept into the 
text, and was there changed into the plural with 
a verb to correspond, εἰσίν ἐντολαί to accord with 
the antecedent a, ‘what things.’ The meaning 
however is allthe same. The Apostle here gives 
them to understand that the regulations pre- 
scribed by him came from the Lord and were 
His; yet not as though Christ (for He is the 
one meant, not God) had in person ordained the 
rules in this matter, but that he in enjoining 
them had spoken as one who ‘had the mind of 
Christ” (ii. 16; comp. vii. 40), and so acted 
upon the authority of Christ He Osiander 


and Meyer). [‘*The continued influence of 
Christ by the spirit over the minds of the apos- 
tles, which is a divine prerogative, is here as- 
sumed or asserted.”’ Hopee]. It was precisely 
of such as claimed to be spiritual that Paul 
could fairly demand that they should acknowl- 
edge the ordinances laid down by him to be the 
dictates of the Spirit of Christ—the expressions 
of His mind and will. [‘‘ Here, as in 1 Jno. iv. 
6, (‘‘ He that knoweth God heareth us; he that 
is not of God, heareth not us’’) submission to the 
infallible authority of the apostles is made the 
test of a divine mission and even of conversion. 
This must be so. If the apostles were the in- 
fallible organs of the Holy Ghost, to disobey 
them in any matter of faith or practice is to dis- 
obey God.” Hopax. ‘No more direct assertion 
of inspiration can be uttered than this.” AL- 
rorD. ]—The requirement just made he next en- 
forces with severity.—But if any man be 
ignorant, let him be ignorant.—The igno- 
rance here may be taken absolutely, as denoting 
the possession of erroneous views ; or it may bea 
simple lack of knowledge or intelligence; in which 
case then it must be understood as a guilty igno- 
rance, since the words “let him be ignorant” 
clearly express a penalty.—-Some (Beza) interpret 
this verse as simply a contrast to the preceding, 
and so put the clausesin counterbalance. ‘The 
‘ignorant persons’ here would thus be the oppo- 
site of the ‘spiritual’ spoken of in ver. 387, who 
is, in this case regarded as one possessed only 
of an ordinary illumination; and then the phrase 
‘let him be ignorant’ stands antithetic to ‘let 
him acknowledge.’ The whole would then 
mean: ‘Butif a person is unintelligent, being 
neither a prophet nor a spiritual person,—then 
will he not be able to perceive that these injunc- 
tions are from the Lord and authorized by Him, 
and for this (?) let him have his ignorance as his 
punishment’” (Osiander). The artificiality of 
this interpretation is not to be mistaken. It is 
better to take ἀγνοεῖ transitively, and put it in 
relation to the second clause of ver. 87, φ. d., ‘if 
any one is ignorant and so does not acknowledge 
that the things which I write are of the Lord, 
then the state of ignorance to which he is given 
over must be regarded as his punishment ;’ ‘let 
him remain ignorant at his peril.’ As BENGEL - 
says: “Ἰοὺ him keep it to himself; we cannot 
cast away all things for such a man. Those 
who are thus left to themselves, repent moré 
readily than if you were to teach them against 
their will.” The Apostle here expresses his 
despair of further instructing a person whose 
ignorance he is constrained to regard as a refusal 
tolearn. A similar use of the imperative we 
have in Rey. xxii. 11: ‘He that is unjust, let 
him be unjust still, he which is filthy, let him 
be filthy still—and he that is holy, let him 
be holy still.”— Instead of the imperative a 
number of authorities, some of them impor- 
tant, have the indicative form ἀγνοεῖται, he is 
ignored. This reading may be explained on the 
ground of offence taken at the imperative; or 
that in the succession of w¢ (ayvoeitw dare) 
one was dropped out and then ἀγνοεῖται was 
adopted, so as to obtain a sort of relation between 
the active and the passive, such as is found in 
viii. 2; Gal. iv. 9. If this reading be adopted, 


CHAP. XIV. 


299 


SS ῦϑὕ ὉὉὉῦὉῦὉὕῦὃὉᾧᾷϑἅνν.ὉῦῸπιπΠΠῦὖὉπΠΡᾷ ΠΠῦὉπΠπ5ῈᾺὃςἀὄι οι ο  τ ιτττοτοσππππττ τσ ς 0ῷᾺΓ!ᾷρ΄ΠΠΊΎΠΞΞ"-ο 


it may be interpreted either: ‘so he becomes 
ignored, disregarded, abandoned to his own 
self-will,’ or: ‘he will be ignored by the Lord in 
the day of judgment’ (Matt. vii. 23; x. 83).— 
Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, 
and forbid not to speak with tongues.— 
And here again the old preference for prophecy 
is expressed. This gift is to be decidedly pre- 
ferred and sought for, the other is only not to be 
hindered. ‘We recognize here an advance in 
the development of thought. At the start Paul 
said: ‘covet earnestly spiritual gifts,’ and 
planting himself on the stand-point of the Corin- 
thians, he had included among these the gift of 
tongues. But after having explained how pro- 
phecy subserved the welfare of the church far 
more, he here gives this preference and only ex- 
presses the wish that no obstacle be put in the 
way of the other.” Neanper. For the proper 
order of the text see critical notes. Ver. 40 
sums up the whole of what is stated in ver. 26 
and onward.—But let all things be done de- 
cently and in order.—In the term ‘ decently’ 
he does not refer exclusively to the duty of 
women’s keeping silence in the churches, ver. 
84. To decency in church there belongs also 
the preservation of order enjoined in ver. 26 ff. 
which is more pointedly expressed in the words 
following: ‘in order” (κατὰ τά ξ εν), which 
refer to what is suitable as to time and measure, 
i. e., [‘not tumultuously as in a mob, but as in a 
well ordered army where every one keeps his 
place and acts at the proper time and in the 
proper way.’ Hopgr].—‘‘It might seem as if 
the instruction given with such minuteness by 
Paul in these chapters was of little importance, 
and had but little practical bearing for us, now 
that the gifts alluded to are no more dispensed. 
A high value is nevertheless to be attached to it: 
1. because it affords us a glimpse into the condi- 
tion of the first Christian congregations, their 
rich endowments, as well as the dangers con- 
nected with them; 2. because it is easy for us 
to draw practical inferences from it suitable to 
our existing states and relations; and much 
that is said is still pertinent to the present time ; 
8. because it furnishes us, as in a mirror, a pic- 
ture of that we have lost, and thus serves as a 
spur to urge us on to recover it again by earnest 
prayer. Moreover, it contains a warning that 
we should not in our prayers put what is non- 
essential on a par with that which is essential, 
to say nothing of preferring the former to the 
latter.”” BuRGER. 

Excursis oN THE Girt or Tonaurs.—In chap. 
xiv. we have exhibited to us the essential cha- 
racter of this remarkable gift. We see that it is 
preéminently a form of worship, a mode of 
speaking, praying, and offering thanks, which 
goes on in spirit (ἐν πνεύματι), and not in the un- 
derstanding (τῷ vot); andthat it is unintelligible 
without interpretation, consequently contributes 
nothing towards the edification of the church, 
but is simply a means of self-edification in com- 
munion with God (vy. 2-4; 5-19). We must 
now consider the question which of the theories 
broached in relation to this gift is best sustained, 
or whether we must pass beyond these in order 
to hit the truth in the matter.—In the observa- 
tiens already made (comp. on xii. 10; xiii. 1), 














the hypotheses of Eichhorn and Wieseler may be 
regarded as having been already disproved and 
setaside. The view of Bleek, even as modified by 
Baur, [that the word ‘ tongue” (γλῶσσα) stands. 
for a foreign word imported and half naturalized: 
in the Greek], is opposed not only by its being a. 
use of language both rare and altogether foreign 
to the New Testament, but also by such express- 
ions as divers kinds of tongues, ‘‘ tongues of an-- 
gels,” and the like; and Baur contradicts himself’ 
when in one place he takes ‘“ tongues”’ to mean- 
‘organs of speech,” and in another ‘the utter- 
ances of those organs,” ἢ, e., forms of language. 
Meyer’s theory (also that of Schultz and others), 
which starts from the signification ‘“‘ organ of 
speech,” is sustained by no inconsiderable argu- 
ments. His view is, that the tongue, set in mo- 
tion involuntarily and independently of the un-- 
derstanding by the power of the Holy Spirit,. 
spoke apparently of its own accord. It was not: 
the person, but the tongue itself which spoke,—- 
such was the aspect of the affair, and hence 108: 
designation. And becsuse this mode of praying: 
manifested itself with various characteristic mo- 
difications (which certainly cannot be explained, . 
owing to our lack of experience), and because- 
the same speaker was obliged to vary his manner~ 
of speaking according to the ever-changing de- 
grees, impulses, and tendencies of his ecstasy, . 
so that he seemed to be speaking with different 
tongues, there arose such expressions as: ‘to, 
speak with tongues,” “divers kinds of tongues.” 
The unintelligibleness of a speech thus discon- 
nectedand mysterious is readily conceivable. But: 
aside from the particular modes of expression. 
which refuse to accord with this view, such as: 
‘che hath a tongue,” xiv. 26, it is opposed by the 
fact that it compels us to regard the narrative of 
what took place on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) 
as a traditional perversion of what actually oc- 
curred: since its advocates cannot—with pro- 
priety, at any rate—undertake to deny the es- 
sential identity or similiarity of the Pentecostal 
miracle with the gift of speaking with tongues at 
Corinth.—[The theory that the gift of tongues 
was an ability to speak in foreign languages, and 
was conferred to assist in propagating the Gospel 
in foreign parts (Chrys., Calvin, Hodge, and 
others) is encountered by difficulties sufficient 
to render it untenable. 1. There is not the: 
slightest evidence that it was ever used for this. 
purpose. 2. So far as it bore on unbelievers, it 
was a signof reprobation. 3. Its only use seems. 
to have been in worship—in prayer, and praise, , 
and thanksgiving. If there was no interpreter, 
its possessor was to speak in it to himself or to, 
God. 4. There was needed a special gift for its. 
interpretation, which would not have been the: 
case were any foreigner present who understood . 
thelanguage. 5. It seems strange that the Spirit 
should have bestowed a gift designed for use in. 
foreign parts so abundantly upon a church where: 
it does not seem to have been specially needed. 
6. Wherever an individual is spoken of as en-- 
dowed with this gift, he is said to have “a. 
tongue ”—even in the case of Paul (according to 
the right reading) which clearly implies that this: 
manifestation of the Spirit was in accordance 
more with individual peculiarities than with ex- 
ternal demands. 7. Onthis theory the gift would 


800 





be quite on a par with the natural ability of 
multitudes in the city of Corinth, who, from 
their commercial intercourse with foreign na- 
tions, must be supposed to have learned many 
foreign languages. Hence in that city would 
this gift have been least needed, and have in it 
nothing striking. 8. Paul desired that all had 
this gift. Why so, if it was not for personal 
edification, but for the sake of preaching the 
Gospel? Did he want all to become missiona- 
ries?]—If, now, we proceed from the earlier 
phenomenon, then we get as the full expression 
of it, <‘to speak with other tongues,” to which 
there corresponds that in Mark xvi. 17, ‘to 
speak with new tongues.” A more abbreviated 
expression occurs in Acts (which we maintain to 
be the work of the Pauline Luke) x. 46, “to 
speak with tongues” with unmistakable refe- 
rence to the first outpouring of the Spirit, with 
the effect it produced (comp. xi. 15). The 
same expression occurs xix. 6. But here it will 
be impossible to avoid taking the word “ tongue” 
to denote a form of speech, and the ‘speaking 
with tongues”? to mean speaking in languages, 
viz., in other than the ordinary ones (ἑτέραις 
γλώσσαις), or in so far as they were something 
before unheard in that place—‘‘ new tongues,” 
(καιναῖς γλώσσαις). Neither can we maintain the 
supposition that one person and another, while 
struggling for expression under the overwhelm- 
ing stress of feeling, wove in words and forms of 
speech taken from some foreign language to him 
otherwiseunknown. Rather we feel constrained 
to recognize in this church of heathen converts 
the reverberations of the great miracle of Pen- 
tecost; in which the power of Christianity, over- 
coming the distinctions of nationality in language, 
made itself known as the absolute religion which 
was to lead mankind out of their apostasy from 
‘God, and out of their mutual alienations, into 
their primitive unity. It was, however, no such 
‘speaking in any particular foreign language as 
~would furnish to a person acquainted with it at 
ence an intelligible meaning (comp. xiv. 2, 
“30 one understands him’’); but it was some- 
‘thing entirely aloof from the reach of the under- 
atanding (while in the phenomenon of Pentecost 
we may assume an operation of the Spirit which 
ensured at once the interpretation, whether in 
the speakers or in the hearers); and it was un- 
intelligible for this reason, because those powers 
.of reflection which condition the intelligibility of 
speech, and unfold the subject matter to others, 
were suspended in their action, and the ordinary 
consciousness of self and of the world was kept 
in abeyanee. In so far as this consciousness was 
always exercised within a particular national 
peculiarity and form of speech, the suppression 
of it involved the possibility of being lifted out of 
this particular sphere into a higher and broader 
one. The Spirit of Christ, which embraced hu- 
manity in all its various nationalities and lan- 
guages, and possessed the power of uniting them 
all in one, effected a momentary dissolution of 
all these limitations in the inmost depths of the 
individual spirit, and so let it forth in various 
‘degrees and measures into this unity which made 
itself known in the ability to produce signs of 
‘thought or forms of speech out of other spheres 
of language, and to express in these the spiritual 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. f 


—+ 
feelings and views which had been awakened. 
This, nevertheless, was done in a constrain: d 
manner, corresponding to the nature of the « = 
stasy, or in forms and connections so new an.l 
foreign to the ordinary modes of thought and 
speaking that no one could obtain from it any 
clear connected sense, unless specially qualified 
for the work by the Holy Spirit. — Something 
akin to this we see in clairvoyance; which, in- 
deed, even in its highest form is essentially dis- 
tinguishable from these spiritual states in the 
fact that the gift of the Spirit was conditioned 
upon no physical peculiarity, that no cataleptic 
states were connected with it, and that its pos- 
sessor was perpetually master of himself (xiv. 
18 ff., 28); to which may be added, that he was 
in no communion with the outward world, but 
was wholly absorbed in communion with God 
(Delitzsch, p. 817 ff.). If we assume that the va- 
rious languages of earth are but the disjecta mem- 
bra of the original speech of humanity, then was 
this gift of tongues a symbolic anticipation of 
the unity which is to be restored when humanity 
is perfected—a unity which will include in itself 
a boundless diversity in the most perfect har- 
mony.—At any rate we are not to regard the 
utterances made through this gift as a promis- 
cuous medley, a mere mish-mash of sounds. The 
individual inspired either took his parts of speech 
out of one language, as is shown in the sphere of 
clairvoyance; or, if he took them out of several 
languages, he took them in such a way as not to 
make them appear a crude amalgam of words, 
but a harmonious combination of terms most ex- 
pressive of deep spiritual emotions all wrought 
together with a plastic skill and creative power 
that removed their separating peculiarities.— 
[And so far as its practical use was concerned, 
may we not take these tongues in their unintelli- 
gibility to have been a sign that in the kingdom 
of God, and under the mightier influences of the 
Spirit, there was a sphere of thought and feeling 
transcending the ordinary one, into which the 
saints would one day be brought, and which now 
could-only be imperfectly interpreted to our 
common apprehension by means of earthly ana- 
logies, and the common forms of speech? asa 
convincing token that a new and marvellous 
power had come down on men to lift them into 
direct communion with God, and impart to them — 
the experiences and mysteries of a higher life 
for the expression of which no existing human 
language was adequate? And was it not to give 
assurance of this that persons immediately, on 
their conversion, began to speak with new 
tongues ?]—With such an understanding of the 
phenomenon, it cannot surprise us if, in relation 
to the unintelligibility of what was uttered, a 
reference should be made to human language as 
not understood by foreigners (xiv. 10ff.); and, 
as contrasted with musical instruments, the tongue 
as the organ for exercising this gift, should be 
mentioned in its most direct signification Sy 
9). Besides, the various expressions used in 
respect to this gift suit very well with this view— 
even the one ‘he has a tongue’’—which would 
thus mean, ‘he has a speech in readiness,’ ὦ. 6.» 
is prepared to hold discourse in a language which, 
as is evident from what has hitherto been said, 
was unintelligible to the hearers. 





CHAP. XIV. 


801 





[The whole subject is one of peculiar interest. 
One can hardly avoid the supposition that it 
stands in some way related to the remarkable 
phenomena witnessed in clairvoyance and animal 
magnetism, or to those ecstatic states observable 
in times of deep religious excitement. There is 
nothing disparaging to ‘‘the gift of tougues”’ in 
such asupposition. The Spirit of God, we know, 
employs the various susceptibilities and faculties 
of our nature for accomplishing its own ends, 
and moulds its operations on human conditions. 
He communicated His will through dreams and 
visions, and, asin thecase of Peter (Acts x. 10, 
compared with 13), even shaped the form of in- 
struction to the bodily state of the person acted 
upon; yet what is more illusory than a dream? 
And why should not these, as yet so little un- 
derstood powers of our nature, be made the ve- 
hicle of these supernatural gifts? Why should 
the fact that they are so wild and strange, so 
often partake of the animal passions, are so often 
perverted to bad ends, serve for an objection to 
the supposition that they were so employed? 
Indeed, does not the power of ‘“ discerning,” as- 
sociated with these spiritual gifts, clearly imply 
that there was danger of confounding the natu- 
ral with the supernatural by reason of this very 
thing, and that there was need of a sharpened 
critical faculty to discriminate between what 
was from the Spirit, and what was not? We 
need, therefore, have no hesitation in looking in 
this direction for some explanation of this re- 
markable phenomenon of the early church, as 
though by so doing we should invalidate its di- 
vine character. Certain it is that there is some- 
thing about it more mysterious andawe-inspiring 
than the simple ability to speak in one or more 
unacquired languages. Wecan in no way bring 
the Apostle’s method of dealing with it, and 
speaking of it, into harmony with the idea that 
this was all that was meant by ‘the gift of 
tongues.” Whether a recurrence of this gift can 
be looked for, is another question, not to be here 
discussed ]. 

Aside from the commentaries, comp. also 
Heubner p. 310ff.; E. F. Fritzsche: Nov. Opuse. 
p. 102 ff.; Kling: Theol. Stud. und Krit. 1829, p. 
487 ff.; Bleck: 7zbid. 1829, p. 17; Baur and 
Steudel: Τὰ. Zeitschrift 1830, 2; Baur: Theol. 
Stud. und Krit. 1838, p. 628ff.; Wieseler: zbid. 
1838, p. 878; Schultz 1839, p. 7654f. ; ibid. Spi- 
ritual Gifts, p. 57 ff.; Zeller: Theol. Jahrb. 
1849; Neander; Hist. of planting and training 
of the Christian church, i. 14 ff., 240 ff. (4 Ed.) ; 
Hilgenfeld: Glossolaly in the primitive church, 
1850; Rossteuscher: The Gift of Tongues in the 
apostolic times, 1850; Steinbeck: The Poet a 
Seer, p. 547 ff.; Pabst: A word about Kestasy 
1834, p. 29; Delitzsch: Psychol. p. 314 ff., 148 
ff.; Fabri.: The Rise of Heathenism, etc. 1859, p. 
18 ff., 60 ff; Kahnis: 716 Doctrine of the 
Holy Ghost, i. 61-68 ; who like Delitzsch assumes 
a double form of charism in Acts 2, a speaking 
in actually existing languages; in 1 Cor. 12-14, 
in newly formed languages. [Owen’s Works, 
Vol. iv. p. 472 ff.; Smith’s Dict. of Bib. Ant. 
“ Tongues”’ ; ἘΠ. Irving’s Works Vol. V. p. 509 
ff. ; «« Gifts of the Holy Ghost called supernatural.” 
Herzog’s Ency. Vol. xviii: ‘+ Zungenreden’’]. 





DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Language is the articulate expression of 
man’s thought and feeling; in it there is concen- 
trated that whole spiritual life which lifts him 
above the brutes. Hence, itis a gift conferred 
on him directly, in his primitive condition, in 
and with his spirit itself; it is, as it were, an 
innate organ or faculty—‘‘no mechanical pro- 
duct of his own ingenuity, but a spontaneous 
emanation of the spirit” (W. v. Humboldt). In 
the beginning man possessed the word, and this 
word was from God; and from the vital power 
which was bestowed on him in and with this 
word, there streamed forth the light of his exist- 
ence” (Fr. von Schlegel).* In the original 
unity of men’s convictions respecting God and 
the world, was grounded also the unity of lan- 
guage. Withthe rupture of that unity by reason 
of man’s hostility to God, in which mankind, be- 
fore united, went their several ways and strove 
by their own power to bring Heaven down to 
themselves (Gen. xi.), the unity of language was 
also lost. A criminal pride—the root of hea- 
thenism,—was also the cause of divergence both 
in nations and languages. It was a divine judg- 
ment by which the historical development of the 
race was revolutionized in its fundamental prin- 
ciples.—Only by a new and wonderful conde- 
scension on the part of God could the salvation 
promised to man be still brought to pass in the 
earth. In Christ alone does man wake again to 
a universal divine human consciousness. A re- 
union of man with God can only be perfected in 
and with the reunion of men among themselyes— 
a union which is to take place first morally and 





*[“The four or five hundred roots which remain as the 
constituent elements in different families of-Janguage, are 
notinterjections, nor are they imitations. They are phonetic 
types produced by a power inherent in human nature, They 
exist as Plato would say, by nature; though with Plato we 
should add that when we say by nature, we mean by the 
hand of God. There isa law which runs through nearly the 
whole of nature, that everything which is struck rings. 
Each substance has its peculiar ring. We can tell the more 
or less perfect structure of metals by their vibrations, by the 
answer which they give. Gold rings differently from tin, 
wood rings differently from stone, and different sounds are 
produced according to the uvature of’each percussion. It 
was the same with man, the most highly organized of Na- 
ture’s works. Man in his primitive and perfect state was 
not only endowed like the brute with the power of ex- 
pressing his sensations by interjections, ‘and his percep~ 
tions by onomatopoieia. He possessed likewise the faculty 
of giving more articulate expression to the rational con- 
ceptions of his mind. That faculty was not of his own 
making. It was an instinct, an instinct of the mind as 
irresistible as any other instinct. So far as language is the 
production of that instinct, it belongs the to realm of na- 
ture.’ Max Mutter. ‘The origin of'language is shrouded 
in the same impenetrable mystery that conceals the secrets 
of our primary mental and physical being. We cannot say 
with some, that it is of itself an organism, but we regard it 
as a necessary and therefore natural product of intelligent 
self-conscious organization.— But though the facility of 
articulate speech may be considered natural to man, it 
differs from most other human powers, whether organic or 
incorporeal, in this: that it is a faculty belongivg to the 
race, not to the individual, and that the social condition is 
essential, not to its cultivation, but toits existence.” G. P. 
Marsh. If such be the nature and origin of language, 
how absurd to suppose that this which was the product of 
the Spirit’s inspiration which was to be the sign of anew 
power bestowed on men, could be any other than a clear 
distinct, articulated utterance worthy the name of language 
and corresponding to the dignity of the Being from whom 
it emanated]. 


802 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Spiritually, and then really, in vivid outward 
manifestation, so that the end shall refer back 
to the beginning.—On the day of Pentecost, 
after Christ’s mediatorial work was finished, the 
heavens descended in a plentitude of spiritual 
influences upon mankind already prepared for it, 
knitting together the ruptured bond.—Pentecost 
was Babel reversed. The mighty baptism of the 
Spirit wrought at once a powerful convulsion. 
The consciousness of those on whom it fell was 
for a while overwhelmed and swallowed up by 
the power of the divine Spirit, so that all par- 
ticularism vanished, and the most perfect unity 
of spirit combined them allin one. As the re- 
sult of this realunity of the God-consciousness— 
in other words of experience and convictionin re- 
gard to God—the one primitive language again 
disclosed itself, and in this they all with one 
mouth proclaimed the wonderful works of God; 
Parthians, Medes, Elamites and the rest hear the 
protenenos each in his own language. They 

ear it; for even in their ruptured state the 
several languages are but the torn, and as such 
mutually unintelligible members, of the one 
primitive language; yet however, in such a way, 
that where this primitive language as the com- 
mon mother of them all sounds forth again, even 
the stiffened members are, as it were, breathed 
into and made resonant by the original Spirit.— 
Hence, even the hearers, though speaking the 
most diverse languages, understand, each one 
in his own language, what the apostles proclaim. 
But at the same time the unity is not yet per- 
fected into something real and permanent. We 
have here not the beginning of the consumma- 
tion, but only the dawn of a new day for the 
kingdom of God upon earth. Speaking with 
other tongues is, as it were, only a powerful gust 
of the Spirit, heralding what is to come,—a pro- 
phecy or a pledge that, according to the divine 
purpose, mankind, though now rent asunder, must 
be and would be restored to a perfect union by 
means of that redemption, which was made man- 
ifest through Christ. (According to Fabri and 
others). 

2. The+kind of address suited to a Christian as- 
sembly. The value of any disclosure in a Chris- 
tian assembly is to be estimated according to its 
general intelligibility and the impression which 
it makes upon the hearts of those present. Mere 
rhapsody of a mystic theosophic kind, all at- 
tempts to enwrap men to the heights or to take 
them down to the depths of knowledge and 
learning and subtle exposition, all flights of poe- 
try and rhetoric, all dazzling display of fine 
talking and the like, which make the listeners 
stare, or may attract people of merely secular 
culture and imaginative tastes, or which go to 
foster intellectual curiosity, or which pay court 
to that folly which delights in what is-dark—all 
things of this kind have no place in a Christian 
church. To the enquiry of a young and gifted 
preacher who was just entering upon his minis- 
try at the Capital of the nation as to how he 
could best insure success, an old experienced 
clergyman replied: ‘So preach that even the 

- Servant girls can understand,—that will be good 
for all.” This is a thing which a preacher must 
lay to heart; and it will impress itself upon 
hima, the more he enters into the spirit of the 








Holy Scriptures and their style as set forth in 
Luther’s version [and we may add the English 
version too, ] and the more he studies the works 
of this great master of popular speech and preaeh- 
ing.—Another thing to be considered and striven 
after is what may be called the prophetic ele- 
ment of discourse—that which touches the heart 
so as to lay open its mysterious ongoings, its in- 
nermost impulses and feelings, its hidden move- 
ments and propensities so that the hearers shall 
be constrained to ask, ‘Has he then seen through 
us? through our secret thoughts and purposes 
and acts? Has he, while withdrawn from ob- 
servation, been spying out our sayings and do- 
ings? or had any one been informing him re- 
specting us?’ To the attainment of this skill 
there is required above all things a spiritual en- 
dowment and illumination. But this can be ac- 
quired only by a more and more searching self- 
scrutiny and by a more thorough acquaintance 
with men in their various conditions and rela- 
tions; these things are obtained in the light of 
that Divine Word which reveals to us both the 
ways of God and man, and is a discerner of the 
thoughts and intents of the heart. And in order 
to make his speech still more impressive, the 
preacher must go to school to the prophets, and 
make himself acquainted with their style and 
language, and so become qualified to use it ac- 
cording to his measure and existing necessities. 

3. The public speaking of women is not to be 
easily reconciled with a truly feminine character, 
and with woman's position in a divinely consti- 
tuted social state. Particular exigencies and 
extraordinary endowments may here and there 
go to form an exception; but, as a general rule, 
such an independent forth-putting of the female 
sex in public is unseemly, as all ecclesiastical 
discipline has maintained ever since the times 
of the apostles. Even in domestic worship it 
indicates a bad state of things, if the woman 
takes the lead, whether it be from the fact that 
she assumes it to herself from the love of ruling, 
or is constrained to*do it by reason of the un- 
christian character of her husband, or of some 
other incapacity on his part. And still more 
must it be regarded as indecorous for women to 
pray and exhort in those social meetings which 
occupy a middle ground between domestic and 
public worship, — presupposing, however, that 
these meetings are of a promiscuous character, 
and not wholly confined to women and children, 
At all events it is important for women, in case 
there should be any occasion for their thus taking 
part in public services, to watch over theniselves 
with care, lest they lose their modesty and expose 
themselves to perilous temptations.—On the other 
hand, it greatly enhances the beauty of a Chris- 
tian home, when there exists between the hus- 
band and the wife a confidential intercourse in 
respect to the important questions and problems 
of Christian experience, such as are discussed 
in the public assembly; when the woman asks 
her husband for further explanations respecting 
any point which has struck her mind and awak- 
ened her thought, and exchanges views with him 
in regard to the topic. In such a case, that 
which was spoken in public will be the more 
deeply impressed on the heart; Christian know- 
ledge will be promoted in the family; and the 


CHAP. XIV. 


803 





wife also will gain in that independence which 
belongs to her as a mother within the domestic 
circle, and become the more capable of contribut- 
ing her part towards the edification of the whole. 

4. A Test. The distinction between men truly 
enlightened and spiritual, and those who, with 
all their gifts and attainments, are still carnally 
minded or mere fanatics and sectarian, is seen 
in this—whether they modestly recognize and 
respect the divine order, as laid down by 
Christ and His Apostles, or as_ established 
throughout the Church in the mind and Spirit 
of Christ; or whether they- under the pretext of 
being impelled by the Spirit, proudly disdain it. 
With the latter, when once they have become 
stiff in their opinions, it is In vain to dispute; 
since they pay no regard to reason and set up 
their own will in opposition to the general order, 
as though their will were the mind of the Spirit. 
Such persons must be given over to the blinding 
of their own spiritual pride. 

[4. Primitive Christian Worship. Of this, as 
observed at Corinth, we have a vivid picture 
afforded us in this chapter. Indeed, it is the 
only one extant of the kind, giving us a clear 
and instructive glimpse into the nature and 
workings of Church life in those early times. 
The first thing that strikes us is the absence of 
all fixed order. No hint is given of the super- 
intendence of any individual or class of persons 
regulating the services in the Church assem- 
blies — even where the mention of such would 
most naturally be made—as in the case of the 
disorders spoken of in vy. 26-34. The exercises 
seem to have gone on spontaneously—very much 
as is now the case in many social gatherings 
where ‘‘the meeting,” as the saying is,’ “418 
thrown open.” Individuals employed their gifts 
under the promptings of the Spirit, as seemed to 
them best, governed only by considerations of 
mutual regard and general utility. All enjoyed 
the right, yea, felt it a duty, to contribute some- 
thing toward the public edification according to 
the ability conferred on them severally. The 
idea that a special priesthood was necessary to 
mediate between the worshipping assembly and 
God, is not fora moment entertained. Indeed, 
it is altogether ignored and excluded on the sup- 
position that all were now made priests unto God 
by the unction of the Spirit, and had an equal 
right to speak the truth that was in them, and 
to offer prayer. The disorders arising from the 
fullest concession of this right, were not regarded 
an evil so great as would have arisen from the 
repression of the Spirit that wrought in all the 
members ‘‘severally as He would.”” The Spirit 
was not to be quenched; prophesyings were not 
to be despised; and whatever there was of the 
carnal and selfish element mingling with what 
was spiritual and divine, was to be separated 
and rejected by the critical faculty of the more 
discerning, The hearers were expected ‘to 
prove all things, and hold fast that which is 
good.” This fact should be commended to the 
attention of those who in their excessive regard 
for having ‘‘all things done decently and in 
order,” proceed to the extreme of repressing the 
spontaneous life and activity of the Church as a 
whole, by putting the meeting entirely under the 
eontrol of a special order of individuals. 











The exercises consisted of prayer, praise, 
thanksgiving, prophesying, and speaking with 
tongues, accompanied by interpretation, — to- 
gether with the celebration of the Lord’s Sup- 
per at stated seasons. The several parts of the 
service seem to have followed one another with- 
out settled plan. The only rules to be observed 
here were non-interference, so as to prevent 
confusion, and a regard for the edification of the 
Church as a whole, rather than for that of the 
individual. The latter necessarily excluded all 
that was unintelligible to the majority of the as- 
sembly. No language was to be employed which 
could not be understood by all alike. Itis a 


rule which by implication condemned in advance 


the practice of the Romish church in using a 
liturgy composed in a language wholly unknown 
to the great mass of the people, and thus pre- 
cluding them from participating intelligently in 
theservice. Hence, in this anti-Christian church 
worship the necessity of a little bell to notify 
the congregation when to give their responses, 
instead of that free intelligence which having 
understood what was spoken, expresses its 
hearty assent in the loud ‘‘Amen,” with which 
the early Christians were wont to ratify the 
prayer and the thanksgiving, thus making it the 
act of the whole assembly ]. 

[5. In all true Christian worship, that is honor- 
able to God, or beneficial to man, the Holy Spirit 
is the efficient agent. It is only so far as He helps 
our infirmities, and teaches us how to pray, only 
so far as He enlightens our understandings, and 
gives us an insight into divine truth, only so far 
as He inspires our songs and praises, that our 
worship is truly spiritual and edifying. Hence, 
the prime and indispensable necessity of pre- 
paring for these services by seeking His presence 
and aid. No amount of learning, no natural 
gifts, no acquired skill, no refinements of art 
can compensate for that unction of the Holy One 
which is promised the believer to teach him all 
things ]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Starke :—Our lack of love measures our lack 
of true Christianity (1 John iv. 7).—The Holy 
Spirit indeed imparts to us spiritual gifts, yet it 
is on the condition of our striving after them 
in the use of suitable means, such as prayer, 
reading, meditation.— Ver. 8. The preacher 
must aim chiefly at improvement in life and doc- 
trine, and, to this end, he must sometimes ex- 
hort and sometimes warn, and sometimes comfort. 

Hep: — Ver. 6f. God reveals Himself in 
various ways; rejoice in Him and learn io re- 
cognize Him who thus seeks to make Himself 
known to thee; thy salvation consists in this.— 
A preacher should so preach as to be understood. 
What does all your art avail for rustics?—the 
chaff of human wisdon for souls hungering after 
the Bread of life? Step down from your arti- 
ficial heights and do not be ashamed of sim- 
plicity in the presence of a thousand illiterate 
persons, because of a few whose hearts seek 
after wisdom, and whose ears itch for novelty.— 
Ver. 8. The reason why many do not strive 
against their spiritual foes, is that they are not 


| urged to it by their teachers.—Ver. 13. 80 to 


804 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





sing and pray that all who are present may un- 
derstand, and be able to sing and pray with 
you—this is the best kind of singing and pray- 
ing (Col. iii. 16).—Ver. 16. O, the wretched, 
sapless worship, when the poor laity comprehend 
nothing, and see nothing besides ridiculous ges- 
tures and all sorts of attitudinizing! Let us re- 
cognize it as a high and noble gift of God, that 
we have His Word presented to us intelligibly 
in our mother tongue.-—Ver. 20. To lust for 
things which are void of meaning, is childish.— 
Well is it for those who in reference to sins re- 
main simple-minded, yet daily grow in the liy- 
ing knowledge of God (2 Tim. iii. 7; Col. i. 9).— 
Ver. 21. Unknown tongues may become also a 
token of God’s wrath, when God lets a person 
come among a people whose speech they under- 
stand not.—Ver. 22. The Church of God, being 
already planted and established, no longer stands 
in need of tokens and wonders, but rather re- 
quires the exposition of Scripture for its edifica- 
tion.—Ver. 23. A Christian must nowhere al- 
low himself to be the subject of mockery,—least 
of all, in a public assembly; he must strive to 
conduct himself wisely in all things. To direct 
all discourses to an unbeliever, would rather em- 
bitter than benefit him; but the Holy Spirit does 
not allow himself to be without a witness, and 
brings believers to so testify of Him that the 
unbeliever shall be rebuked and judged.—Ver. 
25. Praised be God, who gives power to His 
Word, and reveals His true teachers before many 
consciences (2 Cor. iv. 2). 

[pip :—Ver. 26, Observe what should be the 
aim of all Christians—teachers, counsellors, 
fathers—in their labors, viz., edification.—Ver. 
27. All things are not given to all; one must 
tolerate another at his side, and one must be 
ready to follow another, and all things be di- 
rected to the edification of the Church.—Ver. 28. 
If we see that we can be of no use to our neigh- 
bor, then it is best for us to be silent, to be by 
ourselyes, and to pray and to be content with 
our own edification, and deal with God in behalf 
of our neighbor. — Ver. 29. Divine worship 
allows of no disorder. To speak without gifts 
and calling, is improper.—Ver. 30. Let a person 
have what gift he may, yet he should be willing 
to let others speak, and be content to hear (Job 
xviii. 2).—Ver. 31. He who has failed in the 
exposition of Scripture, should allow himself to 
be corrected, and if he hears something better, 
accept the true in place of the false. ὁ 

Luruer:—Ver. 32. Some think that, because 
they have understandings and gifts of the Spirit, 
they should yield to no one, nor be silent. But, 
since the gifts of the Spirit are in their own 
power, they certainly should not use them to 
disturb harmony, and then urge as a pretext 
that the Spirit constrained them.—Ver. 33. An 
irresistible impulse should be regarded as im- 
pure, since a carnal passion is mixed with it 
which ought to be restrained by grace. God 
designs that we show ourselves peaceful in all 
our conduct, and especially in divine service; 
otherwise we give offence, and allow place for 
the evil spirit.—Ver. 34. To teach in public, is 
an exercise of a certain kind of lordship in the 
place of Christ; and it is so much the less suit- 
able for women, since there is in men much to 





be rebuked. At home, they may instruct their 
own, as far as. they know and can.—Ver. 35. 
The man is the bishop of his family. Men ought 
to surpass their wives in divine knowledge, and 
be prepared to assist them therein; and the 
wives ought themselves to be willing to receive 
instruction, and to this end make inquiry on 
points which they do not understand (1 Tim. ii 
11).— Ver. 36. Art thou adorned with gifts, 
think not thou hadst them of thyself, and pos- 
sessest them alone; they are God’s, and are still 
more abundant with others. Be humble, and 
use them rightly. He who stiffly opposes the 
truth, has not the Spirit of Christ, however 
much he may make pretension to it. 

Hepincer: —Ver. 38. Go hence, thou who 
refusest to learn! Do not grieve, my friend, on 
this account. It is with many obstinacy, stupi- 
dity also, and is for the most part a judgment 
of God upon them.—Ver. 40. Both in and out of 
the assemblies everything should be done deco- 
rously, out of respect to the presence of God, 
and the holy angels, and the sanctity of the things 
themselves; and orderly, with a becoming regard 
to time and place and other circumstances, so 
that no offence may arise. 

BERLENBURGER Bipent: — Ver. 1. ‘Pursue 
after love!” We must urge ourselves to it, that 
we may pray ourselves into a fight of love. For 
it will always appear to us as if the others were 
not striving for the same thing. Therefore vur 
love will naturally shrink back; hence, the ne- 
cessity of pursuing after it. And by this, there 
is indicated the true vessel wherein spiritual 
gifts should lie, viz., love. Among these tie 
best is the possession of the prophetic word, 
and an ability to investigate further in reference 
to its meaning. He who means to be diligent, 
will find spiritual work enough; but begin with 
yourself.—Ver. 3. The Scripture calls all pro- 
clamation of the truth, prophesying; since God 
has revealed to us in his word both how it will be 
with us, if we obey, and how, if we disobey, all 
those who speak to others in the name of God, 
are virtually prophets.—Ver. 4. Thou sayest 
well: ‘I edify myself for myself;’ but where is 
thy neighbor? Love seeks not its own.—Gifts 
should always flow into the Church.—Ver. 6. 
We can impart something to others for their edi- 
fication: 1. when we remove the covering which ἢ 
hangs over the inmost recesses of their hearts, 
and show the substratum, and disclose the things 
hidden there (revelation); 2. if we produce 
what we have experienced of divine truth, and 
the mysteries of faith in our hearts (knowledge 
—a result of the former); 3. if we open up the 
prophetic word and the promises of the future 
world, and seize the continuous thread of all 
prophecies, even the pathway of God; from which 
it can be inferred whether a person is in the 
right way, both in teaching and hearing; 4. by 
instruction in the catechism, or by doctrine also 
which is gathered out of all the foregoing points.— 
Ver. 12. Zealots have need to take care that in 
seeking light they do not, like the devil, fall into 
the fire.— Ver. 17. ‘* Not edified’?—a defect 
which Christianity has suffered from, far and 
wide, in empty teaching.—Ver. 18f. The teach- 
ing should be such that others can apply it to 
themselves, and it should be as simple and hearty 





CHAP. XIV. 


~~ 


as if it p/‘oceeded from a father to his children, 
for whic): no miraculous gifts are needed.—Ver. 
20. Spiritual childhood consists in that simpli- 
city, innocence, and uprightness which makes a 
man perfectly guileless; and with all this there 
may exist the perfection of wisdom, which is 
able to answer everything, and to assign reasons 
for all things.—Ere we can become children pos- 
sessed of this divine simplicity, qualified to re- 
ceive the kingdom of God, all ambitious desires 
to display our piety must be exterminated, and 
all heights be laid low.—Ver. 21. The most fun- 
damental truths are, to most Christians, a foreign 
language.—Since for a long time there has ex- 
isted but little love for the truth (2 Thes. ii. 10), 
God has injudgmeut suffered teachers, without 
number, to arise, whose speech has departed 
heaven-wide from the simplicity of the apostles 
(2 Tim. iv. 1-3).—Ver. 22. Believers must not 
boast of that which is appointed of God, because 
of unbelief.—Ver. 24. The Word of God carries 
a convincing power among those who give heed 
to it. It must go to the heart. It pierces very 
deep. The Word of God shows its power when 
it discloses the hidden things of the heart.—If ye 
will be a church of God, then prove by the spirit 
and power of your word that God’s Spirit quick- 
ens you, so that others also may be convicted by 
it.—Ver. 26-33. To judging there belongs the 
spirit of proving in suitable measure. But this 
faculty all the sheep of Christ ought to have 
who, by this means, can detect the voice of 
strangers. Sheep can also distinguish one herb 
from another.—All have need of edification and 
instruction; and this one person Gan obtain bet- 
ter through this one, and another, through that 
one, and the process is assisted by inquiry.—Let 
each one guard his own impulses; where peace 
reigns not, there God is not present with His 
gracious rule.—Ver. 34. As a general rule, wo- 
men should be silent in church, provided God 
Himself has not pointed out a different course, 
as He sometimes has done in the instance of 
some heroic women whom He has awakened to 
act for the public good. Apart from these in- 
stances, the rule holds good.—Ver. 35. But where 
do you find such husbands? If their wives are 
to inquire of them, they must first have learned 
something.—According to the real mind of the 
Spirit, many men must also learn to keep silent. 
They, indeed, are called men, but they are not 
able to testify of’ the truth as it is in Jesus, and 
know nothing of the new birth, because they 
haye experienced nothing of it, neither have 
they the will or the courage to go tothe death 
ina manly spirit.—In Christ there is neither 
man nor woman, but all are one in Him, in 
whom the Word of life itself testifies, as the 
right man.—Ver. 40. Prudence is an important 
part of piety. 

Rriecer:—Vy. 1-11. Spiritual gifts stand, 
for the most part, in the freedom of the Spirit 
who imparts to each oneas He will. Yet much 
depends upon the spirit in which they are exer- 
cised.—Prophesying in its broader sense is the 
gift of explaining the wonders and mysteries 
lying in God’s word, for general use, so that 
others can derive from it, partly, growth in 





shall not be able to respond Amen! 

















805 





strength to endure under manifold temptations ; 
and this can be awakened by diligence, prayer, 
practice in Gous Word, and watchfulness over 
one’s own heart. ‘The gift of speaking in foreigr 
tongues serves as a beautiful reminder of the 
fact that the distinctions introduced among the 
nations by diversity of speech, has been removed 
by the blessing of the Gospel, and all have been 
brought to praise God with one heart and mouth. 
—Vvy. 12-22. Special regard must be paid to the 
larger, and commonly the weaker portion of the 
Church. In church matters it is God’s ordinance 
that everything shall be so constituted as to make 
the stronger and more gifted lowly, and to raise 
the weak. Nevertheless, there must not be such 
a concession to weakness as to hinder growth; 
nor yet must the lead be so rapid that the weaker 
Many a 
one may have too little knowledge of anything 
to express himself suitably in regard to it, who 
yet may be able to assent to the testimony of an- 
other, observe that it is true, and that the seed 
of faith already so far exists in his heart that he 
can join in prayers and wishes for the success 
of the truth. A man of sound understanding 
accords to everything its value, according to the 
use which may be had of it.—Vy. 23-40. Pub- 
lic testimonials and confession respecting the 
power of the Divine Word upon the heart, have 
become, at this day, very rare. In the early 
churches the contributions made in this direc- 
tion, were richer than would be the case now, 
were any to undertake to edify others in this 
way. Yet, still much may be done in aid of the 
truth.—He who casts off all regard for others, 
and insists on pushing everything according to 
his own views, falls into a temptation to become 
more and more ensnared by this habit (30 ff.).— 
Much may be done without speaking, through the 
exercise of love, by quietness, obedience, mo- 
desty. This is often loud preaching enough. 
Women also can be employed in the kingdom of 
heaven, in carrying glad messages, in awaken- 
ing and confirming faith (see the Hist. of the 
resurrection); and we should use their aidin the 
education of children, in caring for ih: sick, ete. 
—He who will not yield, had better be left awhile 
to go on in his own self-conceit, than be perpe- 
tually contended with. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 1. Love is so precious 
that to hunt after it is the chief thing in the . 
Christian life; and even he who has attained to 
love, must stillfollow after it, since there is no 
one who does not daily have to put off the old 
man with his lovelessness, and to put on the new 
man with his love. We must continue the pur- 
suit (Heb. xii. 4), until we rest in simple love. 
If we follow after love, we are on the way to 
spiritual gifts (xii. 31.)—Ver. 8. Edification has 
for its particular end, faith ; exhortation, love; 
consolation, hope. — Vv. 10, 11. Speech serves 
not to conceal, but to express thoughts.—The 
tongues at Pentecost were given as a sign that 
God had sanctified the languages of all nations 
for the accordant confession of the one right 
faith; and the speaking with tongues (which, in 
order to be intelligible languages, needed expo- 
sition), serve for a sign that in the future world 


grace and knowledge, partly, incentive to the | there awaits us a language which stands in the 
cultivation of Christian virtues, and, partly, | relation to all present speech, as the utterance 
20 


306 





of a-man to the prattling of a child.—Vvy. 25, 
26. Nothing is more powerful and quick than the 
Word of God; and that sermon is a true miracle 
of grace which has the effect to make the hearer 
feel that he was addressed by one cognizant of 
the hidden things of his own heart, even as Na- 
thaniel felt (John i. 48).—Ver. 37. What serves 
for peace and good order, will be maintained for 
the sake of the Lord, even though resting on 
human authority. The love of the Spirit teaches 
us both to find out the regulations which are 
profitable for every season, and to maintain 
them in obedience to the God.of peace.—Ver. 40. 
Because faith works in love, so does it work also 
in order. 

Heusner:—Ver. 1. Admonition is mostneeded 
where the spirit of ambition has place. — Vy. 
15,19. Both prayer and sermon must be in- 
telligible, and serve for edification. It is better 
to be understood than to be wondered at.—Ver. 
20. To be incapable for wickedness is a blessed 
incapacity.—Ver. 34. The grounds for this: 1. 


' THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





It lies in the nature of the woman; rer softer 
nature renders her more fit for receiving than for 
giving; 2. her weakness forbids her ceaching; 
3. sin came into the world by woman; 4. there 
is danger of being captivated.—Ver. 37. A true 
prophet is shown by his attention to God’s Word. 
—Ver. 38. A stiff-necked person deserves to be 
left to his own ignorance. Chief practical 
thoughts of this chapter: 1. Shun all parade in 
the use of spiritual gifts, especially in public 
worship. 2. Seek after and promote simple edi- 
fication in divine service. 8. For this, there is 
needed above all things that simplicity of heart 
which seeks not its own. [See on these points 
Hare’s Miss. Com. p. 950.] 4. Such divine wor- 
ship makes an impression also upon unbelievers, 
touches and awakens their hearts, and makes 
them feel the sanctity of a Christian assembly, 
and the presence of God. 5. In divine service, 
outward order and decorum must be main- 
tained in order that disturbance may be avoided. 


XVI. 
DOCTRINE OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 


A. Refutation of its deniers (1) from the well attested facts of the resurrection of Christ, which with all 
connected therewith, pre-supposes its possibility, and is the pledge of its actual occurrence. 


CHAPTER XV. 1-28. 


Moreover, brethren, I declare [make known, γνωρίζω] unto you the gospel which I 
preached unto you, which also ye have [om. have] received, and wherein ye stand [have 
been standing, for7zate]; By which also ye are [being] saved, if ye keep in memory 

hold fast, χατέχετε] what [with what discourse, tic λόγῳ] I preached unto you, unless 
ye have believed [became believers, ἐπιστεύσατε] in vain. For] delivered unto you first 
of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the 
Scriptures: And that he was buried, and that he rose [has risen, ἐγήγερται] again the 
third day! according to the Scriptures: And that he was seen of [appeared to, ὥφϑη 
Kynga | Cephas, then of [to] the twelve?: After that, he was seen of [appeared to] 
above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this 
present, but some’ are [have also, χαὶ ἐχοιμήϑησαν fallen asleep. And after that, he 
was seen of [appeared to] James; then‘ of [after that to, ἔπειτα] all the apostles. And 
[But, 62] last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time [as to the 
untimely-born-one, he appeared to me also, ὡσπερεὶ τῷ ἐχτρώματι, ὥφϑη xdpol]. \ For 
Iam the least of the apostles, that am not meet [suflicient, fzavd¢] to be called an 
apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God 1 am 
what [ am: and his grace which was bestowed upon [was towards, εἰς] me was not in 
vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God 
which was [om. which was] with’ me. Therefore whether it were I or they, so we 
preach, and so ye believed. Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead,® 
how say some among you’ that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be 
no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen [not even Christ hath risen, οὐδὲ 
14 yp. ἐγήγερται]: And if Christ be [hath] not risen, then 7s our preaching® vain, and® 
15 your faith 7s also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God ; because we 


Je) oe-r aoe ww bo 


μι 
o 


11 
12 
13 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 807 








have testified of [against, xara] God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, 
16 if so be that the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised : 
17 And ‘f Christ be not raised, your faith is vain [fruitless, ματαία] ; ye are yet in your 
18 sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep [fell asleep, χοιμηϑέντες] in Christ are 
19 [om. are] perished. If in this life only we have hope [If only in this life we have 
20 been hoping] in Christ®, we are of all men most miserable. But now is Christ risen 
[has Christ been raised, ἐγήγερται] from the dead, and become” [om. and become] 
21 the first fruits of them that slept [have been sleeping, χεχοιμημένων]. For since 
22 by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam 
23 all die [are dying, ἀπούνήσχουσιν], even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every 
man in his own order [orderly rank, τάγματι] : Christ the first fruits; afterward they 
24 that are Christ’s at his coming [appearing, παρουσίᾳ]. Then cometh the end, when 
he shall have delivered up [he delivereth over, παραδιδῷ] the kingdom to God, even 
the Father; when he shall have put down [done away with, zatapy7oy] all rule, and 
25 all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his 
26 feet. The last enemy ¢hat shall be destroyed 7s death [Death, the enemy, shall at last 
27 be done away with, χαταργξιται]. For he hath put all things under his feet. But 
when he saith, All things are [have been, ὑποτέταχται] put under him, it is manifest 
28 that he is excepted, which [it is with the exception of him who, ἐχτὸς τοῦ ὑποτάξαντος 
did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then 
shall the Son also himself be subject [subject himself, ὑποταγήσεται] unto him that put 
all things under him, that God may be [the, τὰ] all in all. 


[1 Ver. 4.—Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Alford put τῇ τρίτῃ after ἡμέρᾳ. Alford thinks that the Rec. (which puts those 
words before ἡμέρᾳ) was an alteration to conform to Matth. xvi. 21; xvii. 23; and from not perceiving the solemnity and 
emphasis of the other arrangement. Lachmann’s reading is best sustained by the uncials (A. Β. Ὁ. E. Sinait.), but the 
Rec. has in its favor F. G. K. L., with the Vulg., Pesch., Goth., Basm., Chr., Theodt , et al.—C. P. W.]. 

[3 Ver. 5.—For δώδεκα, D. E. F. G., the Ital., Vulg., Goth., later Syr. (Marg.), Arm., Slav., and a number of the Fathers 
have ἐνδεκα. Augustine mentions “nonnulli codices” of this kind. It was, however, a correction for greater accuracy, 
while the Apostle used the official designation. Comp. John xx. 19; comp. 24.—C. P. W.]. 

3 Ver. 6.— Lachmann throws out καὶ; but it has important MSS. inits favor, and it was likely to be left out as su- 
perfluous, {or from the copyists confounding -e καὶ with the first two syllables of the next word. It is omitted by A. (pro- 
bably), B. D. F. G., the Ital., Vulg., Goth., Copt., Basm., later Syr., Aug., Ambst.—C. P. W.]. 

4 Ver. 7.—Tischendorf has ἔπειτα, but the Rec. and Lachmann have εἶτα. The MSS. are about equally balanced. 

5 Ver. 10.—Lachmann has σὺν ἐμοί without the ἡ before them [with B. Ὁ. E. F.G., Sinait., Ital., Vulg., Orig. (latin), 
and the Latin writers]. In like manner Meyer, who thinks that “the article was inserted partly, perhaps, in a merely 
mechanical way after ἡ εἰς ἐμέ, but also to some extent intentionally, from a dogmatic prejudice, to bring out more com- 
pletely a contrast to οὐκ ἐγὼ. A reason similar to this last was probably the occasion for the more feebly supported 
ἡ ἐν ἐμοί. Before εἴς ἐμέ, also, the ἡ is wanting in D. (1st hand), F.G@. The Vulg.,Ital., and the Latin Fathers read gratia 
ejus in me. In this case, however, its introduction was not occasioned by the context, but the article seemed super- 
fluous, and it was therefore omitted,”—C. P. W.]. 

6 Ver. 12.—Tischendorf has ἐκ νεκρῶν ὅτι, but the Rec. and Lachmann have ὅτι ἐκ νεκρῶν. The latter is best sustained. 
[It is thus eo in A. B. D. (2d hand), K.L., perhaps all the cursives, the Vulg., Goth., Chrys., Theodt., and Iren. (transla- 
tion).—C. P. W.]. 

) Ver. 12.—Tischendorf, with very good MSS., has ἐν ὑμῖν τινὲς, but the Rec. has τινὲς ἐν ὑμῖν. [The former order ig 
found in A. B. Sinait., Syr. (both), Orig., Chrys., Damasc.—C. P. W.]. 3 

8 Ver. 14.—The καὶ before τὸ κήρυγμα is doubtful, as also is δὲ after κενή. Tischendorf has both; Lachmann has καὶ, 
but [brackets it, and] leaves out the δὲ; probably correctly. [A. Ὁ. E. F.G. K., Sinait., 20 cursives, Goth. and Basm. ver- 
sions, Dial., and @cum. have apa καὶ (some Latin writers omit apa also), and A. B.D. F.G., Sinait., ὃ cursives, the Latin, 
Copt. versions, and a few Fathers omit 6é.—C. P. W.]. 

9 Ver. 19.—Lachmann and Tischendorf, with a great preponderance of authority, place ἐν χριστῷ after ταύτῃ. The 
Rec. puts these words after ἐσμὲν, although this is not the lectio difficilior, [and hence it is likely to have been a transpo- 
sition for perspicuity. Lachmann’s reading (ἐν xp. ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν μόνον) is also adopted by Alford, Stanley, and Words- 
worth, in accordance with A. Β. Ὁ. Εἰ. F.G., Sinait., 5 cursives, the Vulg. and Goth. versions, and some Latin Fathers. The 
confusion into which this text early fell, is apparent from the evident attempt (in Orig., the Vulg., ltal., Goth., Ambr.) to 
make μόνον precede ἐν Χριστῷ, so that it may be referred more distinctly to ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ alone, and not to the whole 
sentence, as it would, be if it were placed after ἐσμὲν. See Exeget. notes and Meyer.—C. P. W.]. 

10 Ver, 20.—The Rec. adds ἐγένετο at the end of the sentence, but it is teebly attested, and is pronounced by Meyer “a 
supplemental gloss.” : ᾿ 

1 Ver. 21.—In several important MSS. the article is wanting before θάνατος. Meyer thinks it was derived from Rom. v. 
12; but it might have fallen away on account of the parallel ἀνάστ. νεκρῶν. τ 

12 Ver. 24.—The Rec. has παραδῷ ; but better authority exists in favor of παραδιδῷ, and some good MSS. have παραδι- 
Sot. The aorist was occasioned by a conformity to καταργήσῃ [without observing that ὅταν in the one case required an 
indefinite present. andin the other an aorist in the sense of a Fut. exact. Instead of παραδῷ (defended by Retche, with K. 
L., Orig., Euseb. (com.), Epiph. (often Damasc.), we have παραδιδοῖ in B. F.G., and παραδιδῷ in A. Ὁ. Sinait., Goth., Basm., 
and Sahid. versions, and the rest of the Greek Fathers.—C. P. W.]. [ 

13 Ver. 25.—The authority for ἂν in the Rec. before θῇ 15 feeble. It is from the Sept. of Ps. cx. 1. ᾿ 

14 Ver. 25.—The authority for αὐτοῦ after ἐχθροὺς ia not sufficient. [Α΄. Ε΄ Θ΄.» several codices of the Vulg., with the 
Goth., anda few Greek writers insert it, but it is omitted in B. D. K. L., Sinait. the Vulg. (best MSS.), the later Syr., and 
the most important Greek Fathers.—C. P. W.]. 

[δ Ver. 26.—This verse‘is transferred by Ὁ. E., Sinait. (Ist hand), one copy of the Vulg. (tolet.), Jerome and Ambrst., so 
as to stand after τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ in ver. 27. Two cursives entirely omit ver. 26 and 27, doubtless in consequence of co- 
pyists mistaking the ὑπὸ τ. πόδας αὐτοῦ of the one for that of the other (homeevteleuton).—C. P. W.]. : 4 

16 Ver, 27.—Some good MSS. [B., twocursives, the Vulg., the Lat. translations of Iren. and of D.] omit the first ὅτι. 
Lachmann brackets it. 

ΠΤ’ Ver. 27.—Sinait. inserts ra before the second πάντα: F.G. omitsit before the third.—C. P. W.]. ἢ 

18 Ver. 28.—Lachmann brackets καὶ after τότε. but Tischendorf, with very good authorities [A. Ὁ. (8d hand), K. L., Si- 
nait.. Vulg., Syr. (later), Copt., Basm., and many Greek writers], retains it. 

19 Ver. 28.--The Rec. and Tischendorf have τὰ before the last πάντα. Lachmann, with some good MSS. [A. B.D. (1st 
hand) 17, Hippol.], omit it. [D. (3d hand) E.F. G. Κι. L., Sinait.. and nearly all the Greek Fathers insert it, and rightly, for 
it might easily fall out, and it adds great force to the Apostle’s expression.—C. P. W.]. 


808 





EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


[We now come to what may be called the 
‘crowning glory of this Epistle, viz., a demon- 
stration of the truth of a future resurrection. 
Forming, as it does, a portion of the burial ser- 
vice in nearly every Christian church, it has 
come to be associated with our tenderest and 
most hallowed recollections, as affording to us 
precious consolation in regard to departed 
friends, and laying the foundation for our own 
triumph in the hour of death. It is not surpris- 
ing, therefore, that it should have been made 
the subject of more earnest study than any other 
portion of this Epistle, and that every line and 
word of it has been searched for golden meanings. 
Happy will it be for us, if we shall be able to set 
forth its deep significance in any thing of its 
true light, and so contribute some share towards 
increasing and strengthening the faith of the 
Church]. 

For fuller information respecting the opponents 


of the doctrine of the resurrection, who are here 


refuted, see what is said on ver. 12. 

[The points of the argument are as follows: 
1. Whether there is any resurrection of the 
dead (vv. 1-34). The affirmative is proven— 
first, by a reference to the fact that Christ did 
rise from the dead with the evidence which 
establishes it (vv. 1-11); secondly, by showing 
the absurdity of the contrary doctrine in several 
particulars. 2. What will be the nature of the 
bodies that shall be raised up (vv. 85-51). This 
is illustrated by various analogies, and also set 
forth in direct statement as to some of the pe- 
culiar characteristics of the risen body. 3. 
What will become of those who shall be alive at 
the second advent (vv. 51-54). 4. The practical 
consequences of this doctrine]. 

Vers. 1-4. Paul here begins to lay the founda- 
tion for his demonstration, which rests upon a 
fact not denied by the opponents of the doctrine 
of a general resurrection, viz., that of Christ’s 
resurrection. First of all, he reminds the Co- 
rinthians that this doctrine had formed a part 
of the fundamental contents of that Gospel 
which he had proclaimed among them from the 
first.—Moreover,—dé here indicates an ad- 
vance in his discourse, a transition to an entirely 
different subject; for there is no connection 
between this and the preceding chapter.—bre- 
thren, I declare unto you—yvwpifw; the 
word is neither equivalent to ὑπομιμνήσκω, I re- 
mind you, [Chrys., Bloomf., Billr.]; nor yet to 
1 call your attention to [(Riick.); both which 
meanings are inadmissible from the usage of the 
word, as may be seen in Ros. Lez.; though Stan- 
ley affirms that in all the passages, where it is 
used in the earlier epistles, it carries these signi- 
fications]. It means, J make known, I declare. 
The expression has something of solemnity in it, 
as though he were about to make a new procla- 
mation. What he intends, however, is to remind 
them of something already known, about which 
their recollection needed to be refreshed; [un- 
less there is a latent sarcasm in the word, inti- 
mating that though professing Christians—* bre- 
thren,” they had so far forgotten one of the fun- 
damental tenets of their faith that they needed 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





to have it’proclaimed to them anew].—the Gos- 
pel—[Not indeed the whole Gospel (us Alford), 
but that which so lies at the foundation of the 
whole Gospel, that which is its main condition 
and verification to such an extent that by meton- — 
ymy it might be said to be the Gospel, so that 
the expression is here used for the purpose of 
showing the essential importance of the subject 
of which he was about to treat. And, also, by 
applying to the doctrine of the resurrection the 
designation of Gospel he teaches them that it is 
not a point on which they were at liberty to form 
any opinion they might choose, without prejudice 
to their own salvation]. —Respecting this he 
mentions four particulars, in regular climax, by 
which he exhibits its claim upon their faith.— 
which I preached unto you,—[i. 6., when 
he first went among them to lay the foundations 
of the Church ].—which also ye received,— 
[not ‘have received.’ The aorist signification 
must be adhered to as important, pointing to 
what took place at the first—their cordial recep- 
tion of his proclamation].—in which also ye 
stand ;—He here indicates the firm maintenance 
of what had been accepted as truth on the part 
of the great majority of the Church (2 Cor. i. 
24; Rom. y. 2). [This remark is not intended 
to flatter them; because all to whom he wrote 
firmly believed that Christ died and rose again. 
Were it not for this, he could have built on the 
fact no argument that was valid for them. But 
though believing this, all had not drawn the 
same conclusion in respect to a resurrection as 
he had; so that he is here pointing to that faith 
among them to which he was about to appeal in 
support of what he had to say. And then, to 
finish his climax by showing the personal im- 
portance of that faith, he adds, — through 
which also ye are saved,—By the use of the 
present tense the attainment of salvation is here 
presentiated, as though it were something alto- 
gether certain]. Yet that he means hereby an 
attainment still future, is clear from the condi- 
tional clause appended. ‘The repetition of the 
καὶ, also, serves to introduce the successive par- 
ticulars which form the climax, [and also to 
strengthen the assertions].—with what word 
I preached unto you, if ye hold fast,— 
There is a question as to the connection in which 
this clause stands with what precedes. Luther 
and some after him take this to be a further de- 
finition of what is alluded to in the opening 
clause of the first verse, g. d., ‘I remind you of 
the gospel, in what form I proclaimed it to you;’ 
but the conditional words ‘“‘if ye hold fast” do | 
not suit with the expression “1 remind you.” 
They also contradict the assertion that they were 
standing still on the doctrine in question, and 
they furnish no point of junction with what fol- 
lows, ‘unless ye have believed in vain.” We 
must therefore connect the clause before us with 
what immediately precedes, recognizing here an 
inversion of the natural order of words for the 
sake of emphasis, φ. d., ‘if ye hold fast with 
what word I preached the gospel unto you.” 
To be understood, we here see the condition 
stated upon which their salvation would be ses 
cured; [so that it is an argumentum ad hominem, 
put in advance for the purpose of conciliating 
their interest in the truth he was about te 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 


TEETER 


demonstrate ].—By the expression “with what 
word” (ri λόγῳ) he denotes either the con- 
tents of what he had delivered to them 
(Meyer) [so that it is equivalent to ‘* what,” 
as in the E. V.]; or the grounds out of 
which (Acts x. 29), or with which he established 
his argument. So Bengel: ‘‘ gua ratione, quis ar- 
gumentis.” The latter is the more correct inter- 
pretation ; since in what follows he not merely 
gives the contents of his preaching (the funda- 
mental facts of redemption), but also he brings 
emphatically to view the grounds ofits truth 
and validity. Luther’s welcher Gestalt may em- 
brace both significations. To suppose an allu- 
sion here to the simplicity of his style, is a little 
too far.fetched. By ‘holding fast’ (κατέχειν) he 
means, not simply an intellectual retention, a 
preservation of the thing in the memory, to 
which the interrogative τίν ὁ appears to point, 
but a holding fast, in such a manner that a per- 
son is certain of the thing. [May it not go still 
further and point to the practical regard for the 
truth in their life and conduct, so as to signify 
their perseverance in saving faith ?]—That the 
fact of their salvation is admissible only on the 
condition of a steadfast maintenance of this 
truth, is still further exhibited apagogically.— 
unless ye believed in vain.—~. ὁ. their fail- 
ure of salvation was conceivable only on the 
hardly supposable condition that their exercise 
of faith was a vain and fruitless thing.—eix 7, in 
vain (comp. Gal. iv. 11; iii. 4). [It may mean 
either without cause, or without effect, i.e., to no 
purpose. Ifthe former, then Paul means to say, 
‘unless ye believe without evidence’ ‘had no 
ground for your faith.’* If the latter, the mean 
ing is ‘unless your faith is worthless,’ and this 
was a thing not to be supposed. The latter best 
suits the connection]. On ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ see 
xiv. 5. This clause is more correctly attached 
to the main proposition contained in the word 
“ἐγ are saved,” to which that which follows is 
subordinate, and to be taken as confirming it 
together with the condition annexed. The act 
of believing stands in the closest relation to the 
gospel as the subjective appropriation of its 
proffered salvation ; and to assert its fruitlessness 
(which from the Christian standpoint is utterly 
unconceivable) would be equivalent to the denial 
of all salvation through the gospel. But, if we 
attach the words before us only to the conditional 
clause immediately preceding, and that too in re- 
lation tothe phrase ‘‘ with what word I preached 
to you,” then would εἰκῇ be equivalent to rashly, 
i.¢., Without sufficient grounds, φ. d., ‘if ye hold 
fast the grounds on which I preach the gospel to 
you; otherwise it would follow that ye believed 
without grounds, in a shallow, superficial man- 
ner.’ Or, if we connect it with the words ‘if 
ye hold fast,” then some such clause must be 
supplied as ‘but ye do hold it fast altogether,’— 
which would not suit. Adopting the former re- 
ference, the connection is indeed simple. and the 
sense good and strong, but it is calculated rather 
to awaken confidence, than to warn against 





*[This accords with the classic use of the word. Thus 
Plutarch τοῦτο ἡμείς εἴπομεν ἐν Ti τῶν εἰκῆ πεπιστεύμενων 
—“this we said was one of the things believed without 
good authority.” Similarly the Latins use credere frus- 
tra, ‘to believe in vain’ or ‘rashly.’ ALEx. Paraphrase|. 








809 





danger (Meyer assumes both?!), or to hinder 
their abuse of it to a false security (Osiander).— 
For I delivered to you—The question here 
arises, first of all, with what is this to be con- 
nected? Is that here set forth an explanation 
of his manner of discourse (τ ίν Δ 6. ῳ), either 
as to its contents (Meyer and de Wette), or as te 
its grounds? or is it to be referred back to the 
main statement in the first verse, ‘‘I declare 
unto you?” The latter is to be preferred, inas- 
much as the manner of discourse is spoken of in 
a subordinate clause. His meaning is, ‘ what I 
now hold up before you, viz., the truth of Christ’s 
resurrection in its bearing on our salvation, is 
only a proclamation of that gospel which I 
preached unto you at the beginning.’ Here he 
speaks in relation to the fact itself, and that too 
in its significance for the faith, according to the 
Scriptures.—Catholic expositors use the word 
παρέδωκα in support of the legitimacy of tra- 
dition.—among the first (things),—in the 
order of time [Chrys.]; or still better, in im- 
portance, in primis, before all, ‘‘as belonging to 
the weightiest articles of faith. BurGER: ‘‘as 
one of the first points. NEANDER. [Rickert con- 
nects the words directly with ‘to you,” as 
though the Carinthians were ‘‘ among the first’ 
to have the doctrine preached to them; whichis 
not true. The following passages from LXX. may 
throw some light on the expression: ‘‘and he 
placed the two maid servants and their children 
first, ἐν πρώτοις (Gen. xxxiii. 2); ‘‘and David 
said whosoever smiteth the Jebusites first,” ἐν 
πρώτοις (2 Sam. γ. 8).] He here takes into ac- 
count, not simply the order of time, but also the 
momentousness of the thing communicated.— 
what also I have received,—rapéiafor, 
because it stands correllative to παρέδωκα, is 
to be understood otherwise than in ver. 2, as de- 
noting the simple reception of a thing imparted; 
and this, not through human tradition only, but 
also by special inward revelation from the Lord. 
The fact itself, ὦ. e., of Christ’s death which he 
was about to speak of, he had undoubtedly 
learned before his conversion; but he is here 
treating not solely of the fact, but likewise of its 
significance for a life of faith, and this he had to 
learn by revelation. So tooin regard to the re- 
surrection. This he had heard of and flouted as 
fable; but its verity was at last disclosed to 
him in such a manner by the glorious appear- 
ance of Christ in the way, that all doubt in re- 
ference to it as though the death had been only 
one in appearance, or a deception, was entirely 
dissipated; and by a subsequent illumination, 
which explained to him the bearing of Scripture 
upon these facts, they had obtained his full and 
firm faith as the fundamental articles of his re- 
ligious creed. [And in saying that ‘he deli- 
vered’ only what ‘he had received,’ he was but 
asserting the faithful discharge of his duty as an 
apostle, which was to proclaim at first hand, as 
it were, the truth of Christ].—that Christ 
died for our sins,—Here the expiatory power 
of Christ’s death is clearly indicated as ini. 13; 
Rom. v. 8 (by the simple ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν) ; comp. Gal. 
i. 4; 1 Pet. ii. 24; Rom. iii. 24 ff; iv. 25.— 
ὑπὲρεεεπερὶ, for the sake of. [STANLEY says, ‘‘ for 
our sins,” not merely ‘in our behalf,’ which 
would have been ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, as in Rom. y. 8; nor 


810 





‘in our place’ which would have been ἀντὶ ἡμῶν ; [1 on the third ἅδν,--ἐ γήγερται. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





The per- 


but ‘as an offering in consequence of our sins,’ | fect indicates that the fact is not a transient one 


‘to deliver us from our sins’ ‘‘‘Yzép has the 
same ambiquity as the English for, in behalf of; 
but the idea of service and protection always 
predominates. Wheneverin speaking of Christ’s 
death the idea of substitution is intended, it is 
under the figure ef a ransom; in which case it 
is expressed by ἀντὶ (Matt. xx. 28; Mark x. 45). 
Whenever the idea of covering or forgiving sins 
is intended, it is under the figure of a sin-offering 
in which case the word used is περὶ, as in Rom. 
viii. 3; 1 Pet. iii. 18; 1 Jno. ii. 2; iv. 10; Περὶ 
duantiac or duapti@v.—But what connection has 
this with the doctrine of resurrection? Much 
every way. Christ’s death could not have availed 
to expiate sin had he remained under the power 
of death. In order to prove that He died not for 
His own sins, but for the sins of others, and to de- 
monstrate this ability and right to confer pardon 
and blessedness as the Lord of life, it was neces- 
sary for Him to riseagain. Hencethough atone- 
ment is secured by His death, yet righteousness 
comes through His resurrection (Rom. vy. 25). 
To deny his resurrection, therefore, is to annul 
also the efficacy of His sacrifice, and with this all 
hope of pardon through Him. - And the fatal 
extent to which the denial of any fact must carry 
us, should be shown as a part of the argument 
in its defence].—according to the Scrip- 
tures :-—He here intimates that Christ’s death for 
our sins was the fulfilment of the. divine counsel 
foretold in the Old Testament Scriptures. The 
use of the plural points to the long line of wit- 
nesses which runs through the various portions 
of the sacred record (comp. Matt. xxvi. 54; 
Luke xxiv. 32). ‘We must keep in view the 
manner in which the calling of the Messiah was 
regarded. It was one towards which the entire 
development of the theocracy was continually 
tending, and which therefore might be found in- 
dicated in various ways. The apostles donot dis- 
tinguish between the ideal and the literal refer- 
ence, as this was not the way of the Holy Spirit, 
but only of scientific investigation.” NrANDER. 
Paul here undoubtedly had in mind, not simply 
such prophecies as Isa. liii., but also such types 
as the offerings and the paschal lamb. (Comp. v. 
7). [Paul protested before Festus that in preach- 
ing the Gospel he had said, ‘“‘none other things 
than those which Moses and the prophets had said, 
should come that Christ should suffer, and that 
He should be the first that should rise from the 
dead, and should show light unto the people and 
to the Gentiles.” And he assured the Romans 
that his gospel was ‘‘ witnessed to by the law 
and the prophets.”” Thus it will be seen that the 
doctrine of atonement for sin by the death of 
Christ pervades the entire Word of God. Hence 
not to believe in it was declared by our Lord to 
indicate ‘folly and slowness of heart” (Luke 
xxiv. 25, 27)].—And that he was buried,— 
[This is an important fact, both as indicating 
the undoubted truth of His having died, and as 
the necessary antecedent to the resurrection. 
In entering the grave our Lord but finished the 
course appointed for all mankind, and it was the 
natural fulfilment of His earthly career. The 
fact, therefore, properly forms a distinct article 
in our creed].—and that he has been raised 





like that of dying and being buried,—marks the 
continuation of the state just begun, or of its 
consequences—‘ has been raised and is alive.’— 
according to the Scriptures:--The testimony 
here referred to bears primarily on the fact of His 
having risen (comp. Ps. xvi. 10; Acts xiii. 34 
ff.; Isa. liii. 8-10ff.), including also the time of 
His rising which is hinted at in the type of Jo- 
nah (comp. Matt. xii. 40; xvi. 4). But this 
type, as wellas the prophecy in Isa. liii. 9, allows 
also of a reference to the burial; but the repeti- 
tion of ὅτι before ἐγήγερται forms an ob- 
jection to this reference. Besides, it is only the 
two essential factors in the work of redemption, 
viz.: the death and the resurrection of Christ 
that are sustained upon Scripture testimony. 
So Meyer Ed. iii. [But how can this be, when 
Peter referred in his speech at Pentecost to the 
declaration of David, ‘‘ thou wilt not leave my 
soul in hell neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy 
One to see corruption,” as a prophecy of Chrisi’s 
burial and resurrection ?] 

Vers. 5-7. And that he was seen of Ce- 
phas,—The ὅτε, that, shows that in grammati- 
cal structure the dependance of the clauses upon 
παρέδωκα, ver. 3, is still maintained; while the 
independent statements begin at the next verse. 
From this, however, it does not follow that he 
had delivered to them merely that which is as- 
serted in ver. 5. He undoubtedly is here reca- 
pitulating the whole testimony in proof of Christ’s 
resurrection, as he had often given it to them. 
That he is following the chronological order of 
the evidence, is clear from the use of the definite 
adverbs of sequence, ‘‘then,” ‘‘after that,” ‘last 
of all.”,—The appearance of the risen Saviour to 
Peter, recorded Luke xxiv. 94,18 mentioned first, 
not ‘‘because the authority of Peter was the 
chiefest, as being the prince of the apostles” 
(Estius), but in accordance with the historical 
order of occurrences, passing over, however, the 
manifestation previously made of Himself to 
Mary Magdalene (John xx. 14f.). ‘Mary 
Magdalene was, indeed, a witness to the brethren, 
but not to the people at large,’”—W. F. Besser; 
[and to have cited her testimony would, with 
multitudes, at that period, have tended to call 
out a sneer, rather than strengthen belief].— 
then of the twelve :—This was the common 
designation of the smaller circle of disciples, 
although it was not then complete [‘‘/welve being 
a name, not of number, but of office’’]; and the 
manifestation here alluded to (Luke xxiv. 36 ff. ; 
John xx. 19 ff.) is not to be confounded with that 
which followed eight days after (John xx. 26). 
Thomas also was not present. The apostles ap- 
pear also here as witnesses of the resurrection 
of Christ (Actsii. 28; 111. 15; x. 40 ff. ; xiii. 31) 
By ὥφϑη, was seen, we are to understand a 
literal perception by the senses, and not a vision. 
After that, he was seen of above five hun- 
dred brethren at once ;—The manifestation 
here spoken of is nowhere else recorded; in 
Matt. xxviii. 16 mention is made only of ‘the 
eleven.’’ The expression “ δὲ once”’ implies that 
the ‘‘more than five hundred” saw Him, not sep- 
arately, but altogether; and this probably took 
place at a time when numerous Galilean disciples 


git 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 


311 


πιο τ τ θυττνν πτὺο2ν τ Ὁ ee es 


were still at Jerusalem, and therefore before the 
termination of the festivalseason. The fact that 
about the time of Pentecost only about one hun- 
dred and twenty disciples are spoken of, does not 
militate with this supposition. [Hopes says, 
«This manifestation may have taken place on the 
occasion when Christ met His disciples in Gali- 
lee.” Before His death He told them, “After I 
am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee,” 
Matt. xxvi. 32. Early in the morning of His 
resurrection, He met the women who had been 
at His tomb, and said to them, ‘ Be not afraid; 
go tell my brethren, that they go into Galilee, 
and there shall they see me,” Matt. xxviii. 10; 
and accordingly in ver. 16 it is said, ‘Then 
the eleven went away into Galilee, into a moun- 
tain where Jesus had appointed them.” “This, 
therefore, was a formally appointed meeting, 
and doubtless made known as extensively as pos- 
sible to His followers; and it is probable, there- 
fore, that there was a concourse of all who could 
come, not only from Jerusalem, but from the 
surrounding country, and from Galilee. Though 
intended specially for the eleven, it is probable 
that all attended who knew of the meeting, and 
could possibly reach the appointed place. Who 
would willingly be absent on such an occasion 2”’ 
—Hopcr].—of whom the greater part re- 
main until now,—This is added to show that 
a large number of witnesses of the resurrection 
could still be called upon for their testimony. 
[And here we have a most striking proof of the 
fact before us. Had the resurrection of Christ 
been only a fiction, ‘‘so many false hearts and 
tongues would never have acted in concert; nor 
would they all have kept a secret, which remorse, 
interest, and perhaps often torture, might urge 
them to divulge—especially as there had been 
one traitor among the twelve; on account of 
which, had they been conscious of a fraud, a 
general suspicion of each other’s secrecy must 
have arisen.” DoppripGce].—Mévew, asin John 
xxi. 22; Phil. i. 25).—but some are fallen 
asleep.—[The sweet language of the gospel for 
expressing the nature of the believer’s death— 
transforming its very terrors into attractions. 
It carries in itself also the implication of an after- 
awakening, and hence is the only term that could 
be used when speaking of death in a discourse 
on the resurrection ].—After that he was seen 
of James ;—This manifestation, which happened 
to a single individual, is also alluded to only 
here. This James is undoubtedly the brother 
of our Lord mentioned Gal. ii. 9, as among the 
‘pillars’ of the church; he is also introduced 
in Acts xv, 18; xxi. 18 as a specially important 
personage, one of ‘‘the brethren of the Lord,” 
ix. 5. It was this manifestation of the risen 
Saviour that proved indeed for him and his 
brethren the turning-point of their lives, so that 
they at once became His decided followers (Acts 
i. 14). According to the legend in ‘the gospel 
of the Hebrews,’ cited by Jerome, James was 
honored before all others with a manifestation 
of Christ. This story is a product of the Jewish 
tendency to hero-worship.—then by all the 
apostles.—Inasmuch as the twelve have been 
already mentioned, the disposition with many 
(Chrys., Calvin, ana others) is to take these 
words in a more comprehensive sense, so as to 







include James also, and other eye-witnesses of 
the life of Jesus. It is a question whether this 
manifestation occurred immediately before the 
ascension. There is nothing in the narratives 
of this fact to contradict the supposition. [‘*The 
word ‘all’ may be used to indicate that the ap- 
pearance was to the apostles collectively ; and 
this, from its position, is the most natural explan- 
ation. Or the meaning may be, He appeared to 
James separately, and then to all the apostles, 
including James. If the James intended was 
James of Jerusalem; and if that James were a 
different person from James the son of Alpheus 
(a disputed point), then the former interpretation 
should be preferred. For ‘the apostle’ answers 
to ‘the twelve,’ and if James of Jerusalem was 
not the son of Alpheus, he was not one of the 
twelve.” Hover]. ‘It was a providential 
circumstance that Paul was led to adduce these 
witnesses for the appearance of Christ after the 
resurrection. Should any one be inclined to 
doubt the genuineness of the testimonies of the 
Evangelists on this point, and to assume in these 
a mythic element, he is here entirely debarred 
from so doing; since nobody ever has doubted, or 
will doubt the genuineness of this epistle, and 
Paul is here speaking of historical facts through- 
out. Accordingly, we may say that the resur- 
rection of Christ is afact as well attested as any 
in the past. Without it there would bea gap in 
history unfilled ; since the resurrection is essen- 
tially presupposed in the very existence of the 
Church as built up by the Apostle.” N#ANDER. 

Vers. 8-10. He here mentions himself as the 
last apostolic witness of the resurrection. In 
one respect, indeed, he stood after the others ; 
but in respect of that which he had wrought by 
the power of divine grace, he had become dis- 
tinguished above them all.—But last of all,— 
πάντων, of all, is not to be taken as neuter 
(as de Wette, [Hodge, Alford, who take the whole 
phrase here as an adverb of order, winding up 
the whole series] ), but as masculine, and is to 
be referred in accordance with the context to the 
apostles.—as it were by the untimely born, 
—déorepeiprecedes for the sake of modifying 
the strong and remarkable expression which fol- 
lows. The τῷ is neither to be taken for τωκεετινί, 
since this form no where occurs in the New Tes- 
tament, not even in 1 Thess. iv. 6; neither is it 
equivalent to the indefinite article; but it is 
here emphatic, the, and by it Paul designates 
himself as preéminently ‘he unworthy one among 
all the rest, [‘*the only abortion in the whole 
company—the one whose relation to the rest in 
point of worthiness was as that of the immature 
and deformed child to the rest of the family.” 
Atrorp]. The point of comparison is not in the 
matter of a suitable education, such as was fur- 
nished to the other apostles by a longer inter- 
course with the Lord wherein he lacked [Eusta- 
tius, Bloomf., and Macknight]; nor yet in the 
suddenness and violence of his conversion 
and appointment to the apostleship (Calvin); 
and still less his diminutive form (Wetstein) ; 
but as ver. 9 shows, his unworthiness in compa- 
rison with the other apostles. [‘*The correspond- 
ing word abortivus in Latin was metaphorically 
applied as here to such senators as were ap- 
pointed irregularly. Suer., Oct. c. 35, 2). The 

& 


812 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





word itself is of Macedonian Greek and corres- 
ponds to the Attic ““ἄμβλωμα᾽. STANLEY ].—he 
was seen also by me.—The seeing here con- 
not be regarded as a mere mental vision, [as 
some are inclined to interpret the event which 
took place on the way to Damascus; but in con- 
sistency with all the previous manifestations 
here spoken of, we must regard this appearance | 
as an actual objective one, just such as we are 
to anticipate from the glorified Redeemer in His 
second advent. [There is a meaning not to be 
overlooked in the order of the words here. ‘Also 
by me” forms a sort of climax expressing the 
great wonder in the condecension of Christ to 
him in this manifestation of himself. Paul could 
never advert to the grace of Christ shown 
towards him without being brought both to feel 
and express in contrast therewith his own great 
unworthiness. See Tim. i. 12, 18. On the 
subject of ‘‘ Paula witness for the resurrection 
of Jesus,” see an able article by Prof. G. P. 
Fisaer, in the “* Bib. Sac.” Vol. XVII. p. 620 ff. ] 
And now comes the reason for this self-disparage- 
ment.—F'or Iam the least of the apostles, — 
(comp. Eph. 111. 8). Ὁ ἐλάχιστος, the least, 
as contrasted with μέγιστος, the greatest ; without 
any reference to the order of time, as though 
implying ‘the last’; for the word is never used in 
this sense in connection with persons. It is more 
fully explained in the following relative clause.— 
who—ir=quippe qui, ‘inasmuch as I’—am not 
Ει--ἰἰκανὸς---ἄξιος, worthy (comp. Matt. iii. 11; 
with Johni. 27). lit. sufficiently qualified, fit, suitable, 
as in2Cor. iii. 5.—to be called— kadrciodar 
here denotes honorable designation ‘to bear 
the name of --- ἢ apostle,—The reason of this 
is—because I persecuted the Church of 
God.—[ This is the sin which Paul never forgave 
himself, and from it we see that the forgiveness 
of sin does not obliterate the remembrance of 
sin, neither does it remove the sense of unworthi- 
ness and ill-desert (Hodge)]. Comp. 1 Tim. 
1.18; Acts vill: 85 ix.1; xxii. 4; xxviy Galsit 
13 ff. [*‘*Paul does not refuse to be the most 
worthless of all, as next to nothing, provided 
this contempt does notimpede him in any degree 
εἴπ his ministry, or does not at all detract’ from 
his doctrine.” Catvin]. But the lower he 
humbles himself, so that no opponent might see 
him lower, the more decidedly he brings to view 
the other side—the glorious operation of divine 
grace in him or through him. ‘ His apostolic 
office he will not allow to be contemned inas- 
much as God had through him wrought more 
abundantly. By reason of opposers he feels 
constrained to array himself in his calling and 
boast.” —Luruer.—But by God's grace I am 
what I δπῃ|:-- χάριτι, grace, stands first by 
way of emphasis. No article is needed. What 
he means to say is, ‘God’s grace it is which has 
made me what I am.’ Grace presupposes un- 
worthiness in the recipient. It is unmerited 
love, favor; here as forgiving, renewing and 
qualifying for office (comp. iii. 10). The latter 
element, grounded upon the two former, appears 
more prominently in what follows. In ‘what 
I am” he refers to his office as an apostle and to 
his qualification for it; (or as Meyer, Ed. 3, his 
whole present state and condition as distin- 
guished from what he was before his conversion. 





This is further developed in the following clandély 
where he points to the consequences of the 
divine favor towarls him in fitting him for his 
work; first, negatively.—and his grace which 
was (manifested) toward me was not 
made vain ;—i. e., was not void of fruit. But 
that this negative statement was far below the 
actual facts of the case, he goes on to show.— 
but more abundantly than they all did I 
labor :—And this was precisely the fruit of the 
operation of the divine grace. And lest this 
should seem to be regarded by him as an occa- 
sion for boasting, he at once repudiates all claim 
to honor in the most emphatic manner, showing 
that, after all, the efficient agent in all his labors 
was not himself, so much as it was the grace 
of God working in him and through him.—yet 
not I, but the grace of God with me.— 
If we read σὺν ἐμοί without the article then it 
must be taken as connected with some words to 
be supplied as the following: ‘labored more 
abundantly with me,’ 7. e., standing by me, or in 
active codperation with me (Meyer). [See the 
critical notes on this point. Calvinattributes the 
omission of the 7 to the blunder of some old 
translator, and insists on its maintenance to 
obviate the inference of Semipelagians from this 
text, who would ascribe half the praise of success 
to God and half to man as being joint-laborers 
in the work. But the preponderance of authori- 
ty is for the omission of the article, it being 
obviously inserted apparently for the purpose of 
vindicating the absoluteness of Divine Grace. 
But it is not needed for this. The language of 
the Apostle is decisive enough without this— 
“not I, but the grace of God did 1]. Comp. 
Mark xvi. 20. By this antithesis, which is not 
to be weakened into, ‘not only I, but also,’ or 
into, ‘as well I, as,’ the entire glory of success- 
ful achievement is attributed to Divine Grace 
(comp. 1 Cor. iii.5; Phil. ii. 138; Matt. x 20, and 
elsewhere). περισσότερον, neuter accusa- 
tive, not to be taken adverbially [(Alford Stan- 
ley)].—airav πάντων, not, than any individual 
of them, but, than all put together. The explana- 
tion of this is to be found in his widely extended 
sphere of labor.—kxoziay properly means fo be 
weary, or, become weary ; then, to exhaust one’s self 
by working, to strain one’s self; but here on ac- 
count of the contrast, ‘notin vain,’ and because 
afterwards the Divine Grace is shown to be the 
real subject, it can only denote the work with its 
results; while elsewhere it denotes the work as 
an exhausting effort (comp. iv. 12; Gal. iv. 11). 
—From this digression, introduced no less by 
the fervor of his spirit than on account of the 
condition of affairs in the Corinthian church—a 
digression, however, not to be construed as a 
grammatical parenthesis—he now returns to his 
main theme. 

Vers. 11, 18, Whether, therefore,—ov» as 
in viii. 4.—I or they,—~. ¢., the other apostles 
with whom he henceforward associates himself. 
‘‘Such was the perfect agreement among all the 
apostles in reference to the appearance of the 
risen Saviour.” Neanper. In the expression 
“T or they,” the Apostle casts a polemic glance at 
the oppugners of his apostolic office.—so we 
preach,—The ‘‘so” is to be explained from 
what is said from vv. 4 to12. It refers to the 


CHAP. XV.1-28. 


313 





great fact in question and its proofs.—and so 
ye believed.—The ‘‘so” here is equivalent to 
“thereby,” viz., that such doctrines have been 
preached to you; [or, it may be like the previous 
‘so,’ meaning after this manner, viz., as above 
stated].—ércotevoarte, asin ver. 2, ‘The ac- 
cordant and powerful testimony of the apostles is 
here accredited by its fruits; the Corinthians 
themselves are here summoned as witnesses 
through the faith they once exercised.” OsiAn- 
per. ‘Faith once accorded often strengthens 
subsequent faith; and its former strength not 
only obligates, but often retains the wavering.” 
BENGEL, 

Ver. 12. Over against the preaching of the 
eye-witnesses of Christ’s resurrection, and the 
faith it secured, he now exhibits in contrast the 
denial of any resurrection from the dead on the 
part of some in the church. And he mentions it 
as something in the highest degree strange and 
incredible that such a denial could be made, 
when (as he afterwards shows) it involved a de- 
nial also of that which was the burden of the 
apostles’ preaching, and lay at the foundation of 
their faith.—But if Christ is preached— 
εἰ δὲ Χριστὸς κηρύσσεται---ποῦ a hypothetical 
but an actual condition (Passow, εἰ, 1. A. 1. a.), 
gq. d., ‘since Christ is preached.’—Christ is men- 
tioned first by way of emphasis; for the contra- 
diction lies here between the preaching of Christ 
as one risen from the dead, and the denial of any 
resurrection from the dead.—that he rose from 
the dead,—Some readings put ἐκ νεκρῶν 
before ὅτε; if this were critically established, the 
transposition of the natural order would be for 
the sake of emphasis also; but such a double 
emphasis is hardly probable-—how say some 
among you—i. e., how is it possible that they 
can say? It does not comport with the fact 
supposed, that in the midst of you, a Christian 
church, there are any who say—that there is 
no resurrection from the dead?—ovk ἔστι, 
is not, ‘is not to take place’ (comp. Eph. vi. 9). 
The whole exposition proceeds on the supposition 
that the fact of Christ’s resurrection was not a 
matter of controversy. Hence, the Apostle was 
able to plant himself on this well-attested theme 
of Apostolic preaching, and controvert opposers 
on the ground that their assertions would, by 
implication, go to undermine the foundations on 
which both stood, and with it overthrow the 
whole scheme of salvation by Christ. That these 
people were Sadducees, is altogether improbable, 
since this class, by reason of their peculiar views, 
altogether ignored the preaching of the resur- 
rection of Jesus (Acts iv. 2), and kept far aloof 
from Christianity. Besides, had they been con- 
templated, the mode of argument pursued would 
have been far different. From what is said in 
ver. 32, we might suppose them to have been 
Epicureans; but these persons whose anti-chris- 
tian tenets would have required a still more 
definite refutation, remained at as great a remove 
from Christianity as did the Sadducees; and 
what is read in ver. 82, is no more than a prac- 
tical deduction of the Apostle from the premises 
assumed, and it naturally follows upon his des- 
cription of a practical Epicureanism (Isa. xxii. 
18). So, too, we can hardly look to find in 
Corinth Jewish Christians of a theosophic class, 





who denied the doctrine of a re-incorporation of 
the soul on the grounds of a false spiritualism. 
‘“‘The Essenes certainly may have accepted the 
doctrine of a personal existence after death, ina 
form not involving the doctrine of the resurrec- 
tion; but there is nothing else here which points 
to the elements of their faith.” ΝΈΑΝΡΕΒ. Itis 
more natural to suppose that these opponents 
were heathen converts of a certain philosophic 
training, who sought to impose, or taught doc- 
trines that were very seductive to the Corinthians, 
predisposed as they already were to them. Such 
would regard, with abhorrence, the idea of a 
restoration of their material part, and hence for 
such, an argument like that in ver. 35 ff. was 
entirely suitable. Among the philosophically 
educated of all ages we discover a disinclination 
for this doctrine; and in this question, to seek 
out a reference to the several parties that existed 
in the Christian church, would be uncertain 
business. In any case, these opposers could not 
have belonged to the party of Cephas, or of Paul; 
and they could be reckoned in the Christ party, 
only on the doubtful supposition that this was 
characterized by a theosophic spiritualism. 
And if we assigned them to the party of Apollos, 
they could only have been certain individuals of 
this party who denied the doctrine in question 
by reason of their philosophical peculiarities, 
and not the party asa whole. It was, in fact, 
no party question. Besides, there is no warrant 
for supposing that, like the false teachers men- 
tioned in 2 Tim. ii. 18, they regarded the resur- 
rection as past already. Moreover, we are not 
to infer from ver. 19 that, together with the 
resurrection of the body, they also denied the 
immortality of the soul. Rather we are to infer 
from this verse only this, that in the Apostle’s 
view the immortality of the soul was inconceiy- 
able without assuming the possibility of a re-in- 
corporation or of a restoration and glorification 
of the bodily life, that the continued existence 
of the simple personality (Jchheit) was no true 
life. 

Vers. 13, 16. That the preaching of Christ’s 
resurrection was inconsistent with a denial of 
the resurrection of the dead, the Apostle proceeds 
to show by a chain of conclusions and conse- 
quences connected by dé—But—[‘‘the but argu- 
mentandi frequent in mathematical demonstra- 
tions.” ALrorp. |—if there is no resurrection 
of the dead, then not even Christ is risen: 
—[First consequence—a palpable absurdity, not 
only in view of what a being Christ was, but 
also in view of all the testimony offered to the 
contrary.] He here argues from the general to 
the special, since the denial of the former natu- 
rally involved that of the latter, it being in- 
cluded under it. ‘If there is no such thing at 
all as the resurrection from the dead, then must 
this hold good also of Christ. He also has not 
risen from the dead.’ ‘The identity of Christ’s 
nature with that of mankind at large—a fact 
which underlies this whole argument—is not 
suspended or dissolved by His Divine Sonship 
and His sinlessness. For, in that He emptied 
Himself of His former glory, He became a verita- 
ble actual man (σάρξ); and if He died, though 
sinless, then can the restoration of His body not 
be affirmed, if such a restoration is impossible 


814 





for men in general who are dead. Of Christ as; 
the first-fruits (ver. 20) nothing is as yet said, so 
that an argument can be drawn of this sort: ‘If 
the effect is done away, then also must the cause 
go with it.’ The statement, ‘then is Christ not 
risen,” is not put forth here as a premise (Osi- 
ander); but with the exhibition of the impossible 
conclusion here set forth his whole series of in- 
ferences, as it were, celebrates its first triumph. 
What consequences must arise if Christ be not 
risen, if he still remains in the graye, he now 
goes oa to show.—And if Christ has not 
arisen, vain then is our preaching,—[A 
second consequence—the absurdity of holding 
that the Gospel with allits provisions and prom- 
ises, with all it had done, and yet proposed to 
effect, was a delusion]. κενόν, which stands 
first by way of emphasis, means here groundless, 
untrue, without reality, not ‘ fruitless’—a thought 
which first appears in ver. 17. Still less are we 
to take the two meanings as here combined. 
The thought is this: since the redemption in 
Christ is the grand theme of gospel preaching, 
and has the resurrection of Christ as its essential 
foundation, therefore, all preaching without this 
must be empty, groundless, unreal. dpa, then, 
brings the inference yet more prominently to 
view. If the καί is genuine, then the meaning is, 
‘if the former be not true, then the latter is not 
trae also.’—The same inference holds good also 
of the subjective reception of the preaching.— 
vain also is your faith.—The two refer back 
to what is said in ver. 11; although the preach- 
ing must here be taken in a more comprehensive 
sense.—i μῶν, your is undoubtedly the correct 
reading; not ἡμῶν our.—To the former clause 
there is added a third inference, which sets the 
preachers in a very bad light—And we are 
found also false witnesses of God ;—From 
the fact that this again is to be inferred from the 
supposition that Christ is not risen, it does not 
follow that this clause belongs in with the pre- 
vious apodosis, and that simply a commais to be 
put after ὑμῶν (Lachmann and Meyer), [or 
after ‘faith,’ as in our version]. Such punctua- 
tion and construction is also inconsistent with the 
δὲ καὶ; [besides, as Alford says, ver. 15 does 
not depend on the condition expressed in ver. 14, 
“if Christ be not risen,” but has its reason given 
below. ]—evproxdueta is put first for emphasis, 
and means we are found, or proven, as before a 
tribunal of investigation.—pevdondaprtupec τοῦ 
ϑεοῦ, either false witnesses concerning God (gen. 
obj.,) or false witnesses belonging to God (gen. 
subj.), t.¢., who pretend to be witnesses and are 
not. The former interpretation is sustained by 
the following explanatory clause.—[«Observe, 
false witnesses, not mistaken witnesses. Paul 
allows no loophole of escape. The resurrection 
is a fact, or else a falsehood; and it is such per- 
sons as Peter, and John, and James, and himself, 
that are guilty of perpetrating it—a monstrous 
supposition, when we think of the men, and the 
truthful ring of their earnest declarations, and 
the seal they put to them.” Roserrson. ]|—be- 
cause we testified against God that he 
raised up Christ:—If a person says of God 
that He has done something which He has not 
done, and yet could have done, then is he a false 
witness in relation to Him, and the false testi- 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


-------- [τ τ τ““-[οΠ[ἃ“[ἐἔἕἰὺἕὺΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠπΠπτὯἭὩτἴἃὔἷἕἝἷὮἝπἷἧἰἷ. 


mony given is a testimony against Him (κατά as 
in Matt. xxvi. 59-62 not equivalent to περί, in 
respect of [Alford], nor yet as summoning God for 
a witness like ὀμόσαι κατά Heb. vi. 18). For, 
knowingly to ascribe to God anything untrue, is 
a wicked and hostile crime against Him; and 
this would be a veritable lie, since they had an- 
nounced something as an act of God actually 
witnessed by them, which yet never did take 
place, and indeed was impossible—whom he 
did not raise, if in reality (as they assert) 
—such is the force of ei ze p, the strengthened εἰς 
and dpa which means accordingly.—the dead 
are not raised.—The last statement is con- 
firmed in ver. 16, which is almost a literal repe- 
tition of ver. 13, and is introduced for the sake 
of precision. [‘‘ But why is this? Why may 
not a man admit that Christ, the incarnate Son 
of God, arose from the dead, and yet consistently 
deny that there is to be a general resurrection of 
the dead? Because the thing denied was that 
the dead could rise. The denial was placed on 
ground which embraced the case of Christ.” 
Hover]. 

Vers. 17-19. Here follows a new series of in- 
ferences exhibiting the sad result of the doctrine 
of his opponents upon the salvation of Christiang 
themselves. As before he expressed the ground- 
lessness, and hence the falsity of the faith, on 
the supposition of these deniers, by the word 
κενή, empty, idle; so now he expresses its fruit- 
lessness by the word waraia.—And if Christ 
is not risen, vain is your faith;—Vain ἡ, 6.» 
without any beneficial results (comp. ili. 20; 
Tit. iii. 9; Jas. i. 26), as is clear from the clause 
which follows.—ye are yet in your sins.—- 
Here we see that his reference is mainly to the 
matter of justification, which is primarily a re- 
mission of sins. All this is frustrated by the de- 
nial in question, since, as Paul asserts (Rom. 
iv. 25), Christ was raised for our justification. 
If Christ was still detained in the power of death, 
then could no pardon be pledged by Him; He 
could not act the part of Redeemer and Recon- 
ciler, but like all other sinners, would appear to 
have fallen under the doom of sin. Thus that 
expressed in 11. 2: ‘‘ Ye are justified in the name 
of the Lord, and by the Spirit of our God,” is all 
done away. The ethical side of Christianity, 


viz., sanctification and liberation from the domi- — 


nion of sin, does not lie in the context.—The 
frightful consequences are shown to extend yet 
farther, affecting not only the living, but also the 
departed.—Then they also who have fallen 
asleep in Christ,—. e., who have died in com- 
munion with Him, being united to Him by faith 
(comp. 1 Thes. iv. 6; Rey. iv. 13). By these he 
means, not the ancient saints who lived before 
the time of Christ, but deceased Christians, and 
these, too, not simply the martyrs (év—d:d), but 
believers in general. — perished. — Perdition, 
according to the Scripture, is not annihilation, 
but the state of damnation, remaining in Gehen- 
na; and this is here brought forward as a conse, 
quence of being yet in sin. If Christ did not 
rise for our justification, then those whose death 
seemed but a blessed sleep to a happy awaking 
in fellowship with their living and glorified Re- 
deemer, so far from having been received into 
eternal life, were doomed still to abide under the 


—_— = ee 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 


315 





wretched dominion of death. A consequence like 
this must have made too profound an impression 
upon the loving disposition of Christians to be light- 
ly allowed. Whatever doctrine constrained them 
to regard their beloved associates in the faith as 
lost, must needs appear to them as in itself highly 
questionable. [‘* Here,” says Stanley, * we find 
the climax of the whole argument. As may be 
seen from 1 Thes. iv. 13, one of the most har- 
rowing thoughts to the apostolic Christians was 
the fear lest their departed brethren should, by 
a premature death, be debarred from that com- 
munion with the Lord which they hoped to en- 
joy; and in itself nothing could be more dis- 
heartening to the Christian’s hope, than to find 
that Christians had lived and died in vain’’]. 
The method of proof here adopted, though in- 
deed not carrying the force of a mathematical 
demonstration for unbelievers, is nevertheless 
fitted to strengthen the hearts of the faithful 
against the doubts of unbelief. It concludes 
with an impressive reference to the sad state of 
those Christians whose hope of eternal life, 
pledged through the resurrection of Christ, was 
thus cut off. This touching assertion is introduced 
without any verbal connective. Comp. vii. 24 ff. 
—If only in this life we have been hoping 
in Christ,—And here we must, first of all, take 
into consideration the correct order of the words. 
The received text puts ἐν χριστῷ after ἐσμέν. 
In this arrangement, which is feebly attested, we 
might be tempted to unite the μόνον with ypco- 
τῷ as if equivalent to ἐν μόνῳ τῷ χριστῷ, g. d., 
‘in Christ alone,’ which would be the better ex- 
pression (Riickert). But in order to obtain a 
correct relation of the apodosis to the protasis, 
we must supply that on which it is properly con- 
ditioned, vzz., ‘and Christ is not risen.’ But 
if év χριστῷ is to be put after ratry, which is 
the more critically authorized order, then might 
we dispense with this otherwise not probable 
explanation. But then the question arises, to 
what does μόνον, only, belong? Is it to the 
words: ‘‘if we have hope,” so that it serves to 
express simply a hoping which remains unful- 
filled, g.d., ‘if we have hope only?’ or to the 
words: ‘‘in this life,” putting it in contrast with 
eternal life; g.d., ‘if we have hope in this life 
only [Hodge]? Or, finally, does it belong to the 
whole clause; g. d., ‘if we have no more than 
put our hope on Christ in this life, and do not 
hope in Him even after having.gone to our rest;’ 
or, as Meyer says, ‘‘if the hope of future glory 
which the Christian grounds upon Christ in his 
earthly life perishes with this life, inasmuch as 
death but transfers him toastate where the Chris- 
tian hope proves but.a deception”’ [ Alford, Stan- 
ly]? The last interpretation deserves the decided 
preference. According to the first, it is not easy 
to perceive why,the words: ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ, 
‘¢in this life,’ are put first. Indeed, they ap- 
pear to be altogether unnecessary. The second 
is opposed by,the position of μόνον, only. The 
expression ἐλπέζειν ἐν appears also.in Eph. i. 12, 
(spes repostta in Christo), and is analogous to πι- 
oreverv ἐν. The use of ζωή to denote the present 
period of existence as distinct from a state of ex- 
istence, occurs only here and in Luke xvi. 28. 
Very short and impressive is the conclusion.— 
more miserable than all men are we.— 


es 


z.e., all men, aside from us Christians that still 

live. In this statement, the Apostle by no means 

stoops to the level of a common eudemonism, 

[arguing here from a main reference to happi- 

ness as the ultimate end of life]; but his mean- 

ing is this: ‘ Christians who live as strangers in 

this world, denying themselves in every way,, 
and bearing life’s heayy load, and enduring alk 
manner of sufferings, and this in the hope of an: 
eternal reward in the kingdom of heaven, are, in: 
case their hope is a vain dream destined to vya- 

nish with this life, more miserable than all those: 
who take enjoyment in earthly things: for these- 
things have some sort of reality; while, on the: 
contrary, the salvation for which Christians: 
forego all, and fight, is but a delusion. (Comp. 

Osiander). [If by ἐλεεινότεροι we understand: 
a positive wretchedness, this declaration must be- 
limited as applicable only to Christians as they 
were in the times of the apostles— exposed to» 
all manner of privations and sufferings; for it 

can hardly be affirmed as true of Christians in 

general, that their faith makes their temporal’ 
condition more miserable than that of men of the- 
world. Godliness hath the promise of the life: 
that now is, as well as of that which is to come. 

This is a part of its glory—a glory which is not all. 
eclipsed even amid the greatest tribulations ; for- 
martyrs rejoice and triumph even amid tortures. 
and flames, ‘‘not accepting deliverance.” The- 
inward happiness they experience is some- 
thing which no mere outward circumstances, 

however painful, can wholly overcome. Would 
it not, therefore, be more appropriate to abide- 
by the original signification of ἐλεεινός, pitiable, 
and understand it as referring to the delusion 
under which Christians would live, and the great 
disappointment: they were destined to experi- 
ence; in case, having given up all for Christ, and 
exulted in hope of living and reigning with Him. 
after death, they should find at last that He had. 
not risen, and there was no resurrection for them. 
Taken in this sense the declaration would admit 
of universal application. Some commentators,, 
like the translators of the EH. V., instead of con-- 
struing the adjective in the comparative as go- 
verning the genitive πάντων ἀνϑρώπων, sup-- 
pose a Hebrew idiom here, and take the genitive: 
partitively, and construe the adjective as though. 
superlative—‘ of all men most miserable’ (JELF. 
Gr. Gram. 3 584)]. 

Vers. 20-22. In contrast with the whole de-. 
plorable results which would follow on the sup- 
position involved in the denial of his opponents,, 
Paul now triumphantly sets before them the ir-- 
refragable fact of the resurrection as established! 
by the testimony previously adduced (ver. 4 ff.), 
and also the significance which it has for the: 
faith and hope of Christians—a significance: 
which is itself a refutation of all skepticism.. 
As Neander says: ‘‘He passes on to unfold the: 
chain of consequences arising from the resur-- 
rection of Christ, ‘and to exhibit it as the begin- 
ning of a new creation which is to find its con- 
summation in the life to come. Nor does the 
rapture of the apostle, borne on as he is by the: 
contemplation of the glorious theme, allow him 
to stop at the point where the argument first con- 
ducts him; but he follows out the truth onward 
to its final ground and goal.” —But now,—?rvv2 


816 





δέ, logical as in xiii. 18; xiv.6; and elsewhere. 
it suggests the subaudition: ‘If Christ has not 
risen then does it go ill with us.’ But now, as 
the matter stands, the case is far otherwise ; 
these sad consequences cannot be admitted; our 
faithis not vain ;—Christ is risen from the 
dead, the first fruits of them that have 
slept.—lInstead of confronting gainsayers with 
a@ negative assertion, he strongly lays down a 
positive, which involves the denial of all the evil 
consequences above pointed out. Not only is 
Christ risen, but, as the risen One, He is the be- 
ginning of a wholeline of those whe are destined 
to arise out of death’s sleep to life eternal—the 
first fruits, as it were, of a resurrection harvest. 
The expression: ‘first fruits” stands in apposi- 
tion with the previous clause, and contains the 
theme of the whole subsequent exposition. ’A 7 ap- 
X47 a3 in xvi. 15; Rom. viii. 23; xi. 16; xvi. 5. 
The same thought is expressed in Col. i. 18; 
Rey. i. 5, by the words, ‘first born of the dead,” 
or, ‘from the dead’? (comp. Acts xxvi. 23).— 
That the primacy of time includes also a primacy 
of worth, and a causal relation to all that fol- 
lows, is clear from the position which Christ 
holds as the Head of humanity, as well as from 
what is asserted inver. 21f. But whether there 
is such a reference here to the waving of the 
first sheaf on the day after Easter Sabbath by 
way of consecrating.the harvest (Lev. xxxii. 10), 
isa matter of question. In favor of it there is: 
1. The typico-symbolical interpretation which 
the apostle elsewhere employs (x. 3 ff.; ix. 8 
ff.); 2. That Christ rose on that very day; 8. 
The composition of this epistle about the time of 
Easter (comp. v. 8). In this case the statement 
would involve the idea of # consecration and 
pledge of the coming harvest. [‘‘The apostle 
does not mean merely that the resurrection of 
Christ was to precede that of His people: but, 
as the first sheaf of the harvest presented to 
God as a thank-offering, was the pledge and as- 
surance of the ingathering of the whole harvest ; 
so the resurrection of Christ is a pledge and 
proof of the resurrection of His people.” Hopes. ] 
Neither the resurrections from the dead recorded 
in the Old and New Testaments, nor yet the in- 
stances of Enoch and Elijah are in contradiction 
with what is here said of Christ as the first 
fruits. Inthe case of the former, there was no 
arising to an immortal life; in the case of the 
latter, there was no dying, so that a resurrection 
‘could occur.—But whom are we to understand by 
‘“‘them that haveslept?” believers, or the dead 
in general? The latterseem to be implied from 
what is said in ver. 21; but that the former are 
meant is evident both from the expression ‘first 
fruits,” and also from the designation ‘ sleep,” 
which is used in the New Testament to denote 
the death of believers only. The question must 
‘be decided by the interpretation we put on the 
following verses, [where we find the explanation 
of what is here asserted], in a parallel drawn 
between Adam and Christ,—first, in the form 
of a general proposition stating a rule of the di- 
vine administration, that what has been taken 
away from us by man shall be restored to us also 
by man. — For since — ἐπειδή, a particle of 
cause, not of time (as in i. 21; Acts xiii. 46) ; 
80 that here we have a fundamental principle 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—.——S_——-KSKg [ὃὕἔ.Ἁ,Ἅ, «Ὁ 


stated, apart from all relations to time, requir- 
ing in the following ellipsis only the supply of 
the ordinary copula.—through man (is) 
death, also through man (is) the resur- 
rection of the dead.—The antithesis shows 
that by ‘‘death” is here meant only the death 
of the body. [The underlying truth here is that 
community of nature is requisite for the trans- 
mission of powerful and all-pervading influences. 
Like can best act on like. The nature of the 
causal connection is, however, not stated. Meyer 
thinks that a knowledge of this is presupposed 
in the readers, as having been imparted to them 
by oral instructions of which they are here re- 
minded].—The general fact grounded on the 
organic union of the race, on the one hand, 
with the head of its natural development, who 
introduced death into it, and, on the other, with 
the head of its spiritual development who brought 
about the destruction of death, he proceeds to 
exhibit more fully by referring to the actual 
fulfilment of this law as it took place in the 
former instance, and as it is to be anticipated in 
the latter. And here we have the formulas of 
the comparison,—As-so—The headship in the 
one case is Adam, in the other is Christ.—in the 
Adam—Instead of διά we here have ἐν in, de- 
noting that each of these processes of develop- 
ment has its ground, or source, in its peculiar 
head. Accordingly, ‘in the Adam” means ‘as 
partakers of his nature which is doomed to death 
as united with him.’ The nature of this union 
as expressed by διά, through, and its consequences 
are more fully exhibited in Rom. y. 12, 15, 17, 
‘Through one man death passed upon all men.” 
all are dying,—[In what sense? Hodge extends 
the meaning of the word so as to include moral 
death. The scope of the apostle’s argument, 
however, requires us to abide by the literal sig- 
nification. He is here speaking solely of death 
natural and life natural, and we are to construe 
his language as bounded within this province 
(so Calvin and others). As Alford says, ‘‘The 
practice of Paul to insulate the objects of his present 
attention from all ulterior considerations must be 
carefully borne in mind.” Barnesalso argues for 
the same limitation with great pertinence ].—As 
the other member of the comparison we haye—so 
also in the Christ shall all be made alive. 
In the former.case, since death was ever in pro-- 
gress, the verb was in the present, ato 0 vq σ- 
κουσιν, but here on the contrary the restoration 
is spoken of as something yet to be,—hence the 
future ζωοποιηϑήσονται. Here, however, 
commentators divide. Some, starting from the 
idea of a vital communion with Christ which 
reaches its perfect consummation at the resur- 
rection, understand by ‘being made alive’ an 
introduction into a state of supreme blessedness. 
In this case, they interpret the term ‘‘all” either 
relatively, taking it to denote all believers only, 
who alone are spoken of in the context; or ab- 
solutely, finding in this passage a statement of 
universal salvation (comp. ver. 28)—‘‘the resto- 
ration of all” (αποκατάστασις πάντων). The ques- 
tion is, Ought not the word ‘ all” to have 
the same scope in the two clauses? The context 
does not justify our limiting it to believers 
in the first clause; for he is throughout treating 
of the resurrection of the dead in general, what 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 





ever may have been their religious state, and of 
Christ as the person who in this respect has 
taken the lead, and by His resurrection has fixed 
a point in history from whence death as the 
separation of soul and body should date its 
cessation, even as from Adam it dated its com- 
mencement. But whether the dogma of a gene- 
ral restoration is a Pauline doctrine is, to say the 
least, very problematical (comp. vi. 9 ff.; 2 Thess. 
i. 9.) As Burger says, ‘‘It is not possible to 
prove from our text, nor yet from the whole 
context, the doctrine of a so-called restoration 
of all things, which asserts that all at last, both 
good and bad, even the devil and his angels, 
shall be made partakers of divine grace.” 
Elsewhere, Paul speaks of ‘‘a resurrection of 
the dead, both of the just and of the unjust” 
(Acts xxiv. 15). Of this mention is made also 
in Jno. v. 28ff., where it appears as the work of 
the Messiah whom the Jews expected to be the 
general quickener of the dead (comp. Liicke on 
Jno. v. 21 ff.; and de Wette, Bibl. Dogm., p. 
203).—But the expression, ‘‘be made alive” might 
be used to signify the resurrection of both 
classes (Rom. iv. 17). It means to be restored 
to life in general; its specific application must 
be determined by the context: an ethical, natu- 
ral introduction into life generally, and into a 
truly blessed life. Accordingly we must side 
with those who take the word ‘“all” in its 
broadest sense, and understand ‘the being made 
alive’ of a general resurrection. For to inter- 
pret the second clause of the comparison ideally, 
of the original destination of all men to a blessed 
resurrection and of the power of the Redeem- 
er to make all share in it (J. Miiller Stud. und 
Krit. 1835. p. 751) would hardly be doing full 
justice to the expression.—But is not the above 
interpretation opposed by the words ‘‘in Christ?” 
No; for we might say, the whole race obtains in 
Christ the principle of the Resurrection. He, the 
second Adam, has been implanted in humanity as 
the destroyer of death; and the result of this 
will indeed prove glorious or fearful according 
to the relation which the individual may sustain 
towards Him, whether positive or negative. 
Nothing, it would seem, can be decisively ad- 
duced against this broader interpretation, from 
the fact, that in the onward course of his argu- 
ment the apostle brings into view only the res- 
urrection of believers; since the problem before 
him by no means required a complete unfolding 
of the whole subject, in all its aspects. With all 
this, however, it still remains doubtful whether 
‘‘the resurrection unto damnation,’ which is 
contrasted with ‘‘the resurrection unto life” 
(Jno. v. 29,) can be covered by the expression 
‘made alive.” At all events, a consistency with 
the main clause (ver. 20) would be preserved if 
we interpreted ‘‘all” inthe second clause of the 
antithesis to mean the totality of those who shall 
be made alive, whoever they are, as in the first 
clause, to mean the totality of those who die. 
Accordingly the main thought would be, that 
Christ, as the risen One, isthe informing principle, 
and commencement of all restoration to life in the 
race on the part of God. In this respect, He 
constitutes a parallel to Adam, who was the in- 
forming principle and commencement of all 
death. It is true, the expression ‘‘each one” 
in the next verse, 8) far as it may stretch even 


817 


beyond ‘‘those that are Christ’s,” seems to re 
quire us to take ‘‘all”’ in the broadest sense, and 
also to give the broader meaning to ‘‘ make alive” 
(Meyer); but, opposed to this, there stands, 
again, the word ‘first fruits,” the inconsistency 
of using which in relation to those awaking to 
“the resurrection of damnation,” reasonably 
awakens doubt. [Hodge, interpreting the word 
ζωοπιοιεῖσϑαι in a moral as well as physical sense 
on grounds hardly tenable, restricts the term 
‘‘all” to believers. But the great majority 
of commentatators, ancient as well as modern, 
(Chrys. Theod. Theoph. Beza, Olsh. de Wette, 
Meyer, Bloomf., Barnes) abide by the universal 
reference, preserving the parallelism in both 
clauses. ‘‘As the death of all mankind came 
by Adam, so the resurrection of all men came by 
Christ ; the wicked shall be raised by Him ofi- 
cio Judicis, by the power of Christ as their Lord 
and Judge: The righteous shall be raised benefi- 
cio Meditatoris, by virtue of their union with Him 
as their head.” Vanpy. The necessity for adopting 
this view will more fully appear as we proceed. ] 

Vers. 23-28.—Passing on now from the suc- 
cessive stages of the resurrection, the apostle 
proceeds to open a view into the final consum- 
mation of the divine economy, at the conclusion 
of the ways of God with man. First—we have 
the several steps of the great process of restora- 
tion in Christ set forth. But every one—sc. 
‘shall be raised,’ or ‘made alive ’—in his own 
order :—The word τάγμα does not mean series, 
but α well ordered multitude, a division of the army, 
a cohort; and only in this sense can it be trans- 
lated order. Those who are raised at successive 
periods of time are conceived of as coming 
forth in troops or bands, in some one of which 
every one will be found. [Hodge says, however, 
that ‘“‘the word is used by later writers, as 
Clemens in his epistle to the Cor. i. 87 and 41, in 
the sense of τάξις, order of succession. And this 
best suits the context, for Christ is not a band. 
All that Paul teaches is, that, although the res- 
urrection of Christ secures that of His people, 
the two events are not contemporaneous.’ ] 
Ἶ δίῳ, his own, that which belongs to him, and fits 
him—<éavrov. [If we adopt the meaning of band 
or cohort for τάγμα, then the implication is that 
those in Christ will come forth by themselves, and 
the wicked by themselves—those of a kind keep- 
ing together. And this will be the natural 
order, since ‘‘ those who sleep in Jesus, God will 
bring with Him.” ]|—Christ the first fruits ;— 
He forms the first division, [as being a host in 
himself], which leads the ranks of those who are 
to be made alive hereafter. The expression 
corresponding tothe figure would be ἀρχηγός, 
leader, captain (comp. Meyer hocloco.) The res- 
urrection of all, Christ’s included, is a great 
fact.—The next division is composed of—those 
that are Christ’s—The expression is found 
also in Gal. v. 24.—The time of their rising is 
at his coming.—By the παρουσία here, is not 
meant Christ’s continued presence on earth (Matt. 
xxviii. 20) onward unto his ‘glorious appear- 
ing;’’ but, as elsewhere (1 Thes.; 2 Thes.; 
2 Pet.; 1 John; James; Matt. xxiv. 3, 27, 37, 
39), His revelation in power for the setting up of 
His kingdom. With this the first resurrection, 
that of the dead in the Christ (Thes. iv. 16; 
comp. Rey. xx. 5) is coincident, and it follows 





818 





upon the destruction of the anti-Christian 
powers (Rey. xix.;2 Thes.ii.). By those who 
are Christ’s, we may understand either true Chris- 
tians or Christians in general. Meyer says, the 
latter, referring to 2 Cor. vy. 10; Rom. xiv. 10. 
But it is a question whether the expressions, 
«‘those who are Christ’s,’’ and, ‘‘the dead in 
Christ,” can be used of formal Christians who 
finally perish.—Afterwards—eira introduces a 
new epoch (analogous to ἔπειτα) which follows 
after an interval, when we have the conclusion of 
the whole development. [Hodge questions this, 
and says, ‘‘it has been the constant [?] faith of 
the Church that the second advent of Christ, the 
resurrection of the just and of the unjust, the 
final judgment and end of the world, are parts 
of one great transaction.” But to interpret 
thus, would be both to make the réy wa (—raéic), 
series, very short, consisting of only two items! 
and also to contradict the constant use of εἶτα 
which never stands fort dre, then, as indicating 
a point of specified time, but always afterward, 
next, denoting successive occurrence (Mark iv. 
28; 1 Cor. xii. 28). It isa singular illustration 
of the power of a theory to warp fhe mind from 
the fixed meaning of words, that Calvin, while 
using the Latin text which rightly translated 
εἶτα, postea, yet goes on to comment in the use 
of tunc, utterly ignoring the difference of signi- 
fication. By the words ἔπειτα and εἶτα, two 
separate epochs are distinctly marked; and it is 
a violation of all usage of terms to construe 
them otherwise. The interval between the first 
and second is stretching beyond 1800. years; 
how many ages will intervene between the 
second and third—who can tell?]—the end,— 
τέλος in this connection means the termination 
of the process of the resurrection, and stands 
correlatively to ‘‘the first fruits; it marks the 
period of the resurrection of the rest of man- 
kind who do not belong to Christ, yet among 
whom may be found some that are susceptible 
of the divine quickening (comp. Matt. xxv. 31; 
[where, at the general judgment, those on the 
right hand, by reason of their declared igno- 
rance of Christ, are supposed, by many, to be 
those among the heathen who, by their fidelity 
to the light within them, and by their general 
kindness and charity, had evinced a state of 
mind which qualified them for a welcome into 
the society of believers. Consult Stier, Olsh., and 
Alford on this passage.]) The period, thus des- 
ignated, is one which coincides with the end of 
the world, with the entire destruction of the pres- 
ent order of things, and with the coming in of the 
‘new heavens and the new earth.” [Alford, 
Hodge, and others, however, interpret τὸ τέλος 
absolutely, THE END, 7. e., of the world, when all 
shall be accomplished, and the mediatorial work 
of Christ is come to its conclusion]. As to what 
shall intervene between these two points—the 
first and the second resurrection—and as to the 
duration of the interval, there is nothing in the 
apostolic writings (save what is contained inthe 
Apocalypse) clearly determined as yet. Thus 
far this whole subjectis enveloped in darkness— 
just as in the prophets, the coming of Christ in 
the flesh, and His coming in glory were not defi- 
nitely separated; but the intervening period, 
with all its history, lay for the time concealed. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





In the parousia or revelation of Christ, we may 
distinguish between the beginning of that mani- 
festation of the Lord’s power in the first resur- 
rection, and in all that which is to precede or is 
connected with it, and its consummation in the ge 
neral resurrection of the dead, and in the great 
events connected with that (Matt. xxv. 31 ff.); 
and this, in fact, amounts to a distinction between 
a second and third advent. Respecting ‘the 
end,” he explains himself more fully by men- 
tioning that which is to occur contemporane- 
ously with it. —when he shall deliver up 
the kingdom to the God and Father, 
—From this passage some have unwarrantably 
inferred that we are to understand ‘the end” 
to be the end of Christ’s kingdom, and so supply 
the words, ‘of his kingdom.’ But that which is 
asserted here of His kingdom is something ap- 
pended, to which the course of the Apostle’s 
reasoning does not immediately conduct him. 
The transfer of the kingdom to God and Father 
(who is at the same time the Father of Jesus 
Christ —the article prefixed embracing both 
words (τῷ Θεῷ καὶ Πατρὶ) as in Rom. xy. 6f.) 
presupposes that revelation of Christ as the So- 
vereign of God’s kingdom—as the Possessor of 
a power that covers heaven and earth (Matt. 
xxviii. 18), which takes place at His advent; 
and it is itself the termination of the mediatorial 
reign (7. 6., of that progressive struggle with the 
hostile. powers of darkness, and subsequent sub- 
jection to God in the power of the redeeming and 
atoning work of the Lord, who is the royal The- 
anthropos, the God-Man, the perfect Vicar of 
God), and the commencement of the absolute, 
immediate, Divine rule, when the Son is to trans- 
fer unto the Father the whole universe as a realm 
made entirely subject to Him, having in itno op- 
posing force, where He can rule with majesty 
serene and undisturbed; inasmuch as the Son 
who entered into the course of its history, and 
took part in its strife, has overcome all opposi- 
tion, so that resistance no more is to be found.— 
[‘‘Nothing is here said which can affect either 
(1) His co-equality and co-eternity with the Fa- 
ther in the Godhead, which is prior to, and in- 
dependent of this mediatorial work, and is not 
limited to the mediatorial kingdom; or (2) the 
eternity of His humanity: for that humanity. 
ever was, and is subordinate to the Father; and 
it by no means follows that when the mediatorial 
kingdom shall be given up to the Father, the hu- 
manity in which that’kingdom was won, shall be 
put off; nay, the very fact-of Christ in the body 
being the first-fruits of the resurrection, proves 
that His body, as ours will endure for ever; as 
the truth that our humanity, even in glory, can 
only subsist before God by virtue of His Huma- 
nity, makes it plain that He will be very man to 
all eternity.” Atrorp].* Βασιλεία here 


*(“ The Scriptures constantly teach that Christ’s kingdom 
is an everlasting kingdom, and of His dominion there is no 
end. In what sense, then, can He be said to deliver up His 
kingdom? It must be remembered that the Scriptures 
speak of a threefold kingdom as belonging to Christ. 1. 
That which necessarily belongs to Him as a Divine person, 
extending over all creatures, and of which He can never di- 
vest Himself. 2. That which belongs to Him as the incar- 
nate Son of God, extending over His own people. This also 
is everlasting. He will for ever remain the Head and Sove- 
reign of the redeemed. 3. That dominion to which He was 
exalted after His resurrection, when all power in heaven 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 





means not the subjects of kingly rule—the king- 
dom so far as its contents are concerned, but the 
royal power itself, in its exercise—the reign of 
Christ. ‘*Inasmuch as the work of Christ, 
founded upon His redemptive acts, proceeds to- 
wards a definite goal, it must needs come to a 
termination when this goal is reached.” NeEan- 
peR.—The transfer takes place,— when he 
shall have put downall rule, and all au- 
thority and power.—Of course such only are 
meant as are anti-Christian and anti-Divine— 
the kingdom of Satan, with every thing apper- 
taining to it, which holds supremacy and exer- 
cises power, whether it be demoniac (Eph. vi. 
12; Col. ii. 15), or human that has become sub- 
ject to demoniac powers. Calvin’s supposition, 
that ‘‘ powers legitimate and ordained by God,” 
or Olshausen’s, ‘‘ that all rule, good and evil, even 
that of the Son,’”’ is here meant, is inconsistent 
with the connection (ver. 25), and also with the 
signification of καταργεῖν, to put down. The ex- 
termination of the powers of the higher spiritual 
world can be understood to denote only the de- 
struction of their external activity—the stripping 
them of their power, but not of their existence 
(Neander).—But the whole idea of a transfer and 
of a kingdom is altered, if we assume the meaning 
here to be, that God shall be generally acknow- 
ledged as the Supreme Ruler (Theod. Estius, ee. ; 
comp. per contra Osiander, p. 711). Unsatisfac- 
tory, also, is Meyer’s conception of Christ as the 
under-regent—as it were, the life-bearer of God. 
—The explanation of the Fathers who interpret 
it of the leading of the elect to behold the face of 
God, the transfer of the heirs of the kingdom into 
the immediate communion and glory of God the 
Father; and that of the Reformers, who take it 
to denote the presentation of the risen members 
of the divine kingdom before God, 6. g., ‘‘ He pre- 
sents the elect to God, in whom, henceforth, the 
Father will reign per sese without intervening 
token, and in whom He will reveal His glory per 
sese, and not in Christo only,”—transcend the 
correct meaning of the words and the scope of 
the context. From this surrender of the king- 
dom, we are not to suppose that the eternal king- 
ship of Christ is disowned or denied; for He is 
indeed the Eternal associate with God on the 
throne (σύνϑρονος). This relationship is only, as 
it were, taken up in with the glory of the Father. 
After the great battle has been victoriously 
fought through, and the work of the Mediator 
has been finished up, then that rule which has 
been occupied in the conflict and mediation, na- 
turally ceases. But inasmuch as every thing has 
at last been brought into subjection to the Father, 
and so the purpose of the mediatorial reign has 
been accomplished, the regal glory of the Son, 
so far from being annihilated thereby, has only 
been enhanced. 

The fact of such a transfer of the kingdom en- 








and earth was committed to His hands. This kingdom, 
which He exercises as the Theanthropos. and which ex- 
tends over all principalities and powers, He is to deliver up 
when the work of redemption is accomplished. He was in- 
vested with this dominion in His mediatorial character for 
the purpose of carrying on His work to its consummation. 
When that is done, t.e., when He has subdued all His ene- 
mies, then He wi}l no longer reign over the universe as Me- 
diator, but only as God; while His headship over His people 
is to continue for ever.” Hope}. 





319 





suing upon the putting down of all alien rule, 
and not before, is next referred to a higher ne- 
cessity, even to a divine decree, and on this it is 
made to rest (y d@p).—For it must needs be 
that he reign until he hath put all ene- 
mies under his feet.—The authority had in 
mind by the Apostle is Ps. ex. 1, ‘*The Lord 
said unto my Lord, sit Thou at my right hand, 
until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.” 
From this it might be inferred that the subject 
of the verb 37, hath put, is God; and then, inas- 
much as this verse expresses essentially the same 
thought as is found in the last clause of the pre- 
vious verse, ‘‘ when He shall have put down all 
rule,”’ efc., we must likewise suppose that God 
was intended there also. But it is evident that 
He who ‘puts down all rule,’’ must be the same 
as the one who “‘ gives up the kingdom;” and nei- 
ther the reference to the Psalm (which is here 
not literally cited, but only appropriated, and 
freely handled), nor yet ver. 27, (where indeed 
God is the subject of ὑπέταξεν, put under, but so 
that a passive clause intervenes) constrains us 
to suppose that there is any other subject than 
Christ in this verse. And were it otherwise in- 
tended, we would, for the sake of clearness, na- 
turally expect that God would be definitely men* 
tioned both here and before καταργήσῃ (ver. 24), 
because these clauses are so closely connected with 
clauses where Christ is the expressed subject. 
From the phrase ‘‘all enemies,” it is perfectly 
clear that the words “allrule” (tacav ἀρχῆν) 
are not to be taken in a, middle sense. The ne- 
cessity here spoken of (ὃ εἴ) is founded on a di- 
vine decree (Neander). Comp. Luke xxiv. 26, 
46. The arch-enemy of all is he from whom all 
opposition to Christ and His kingdom proceeds 
(comp. Matt. xiii. 89); with him are connected 
all powers instrumental in carrying on this op- 
position, and every thing wherein this opposi- 
tion is manifested — hence, also, death itself. 
Comp. what is said in Hebrews ii. 14, “that 
through death He might destroy him that had 
the power of death, even the deyil.”—a χρις οὗ 
marks the point of termination. Only in case 
ἄχρις ἄν stood without οὗ could it mean also so 
long as; but such a rendering is decidedly op- 
posed by the context (ver. 24) as well as by 
the aor. subj. (97). The putting under foot de- 
notes the most perfect subjection in connection 
with the deepest humiliation. Comp. Josh x. 
24, where Joshua bade the captains of the men 
of war come near and put their feet upon the 
necks of the conquered kings of Canaan. A si- 
milar expression occurs in Rom. xvi. 20, ‘* The 
God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet.” 
That which already has taken place in its essen- 
tial principles through the incarnation, death, 
and resurrection of Jesus Christ (comp. Luke 
x. 18f.; Jno. xvi. 11, 33), comes at last gradu- 
ally to its fulfilment, being realized onward, step 
by step, until the grand termination is reached. 
Or, we may say, that that which was consum~ 
mated by those acts in relation to Christ’s per- 
son, and which His followers may regard as 
having been accomplished also for them (comp. 
1 Jno. τ. 4), is carried out at last in relation to 
the whole sphere of redemption along the lapse 
of ages, and finally comes to its complete fulfil- 


| ment after the fearful conflicts of the last times. 


320 


‘THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Out of the whole number of foes here alluded 
to, the apostle brings prominently to view that 
one whose destruction forms the close of the 
forementioned subjugation.—The last enemy 
(that) shall be destroyed (is) death.— 
ἐμ the English version renders "Eo yaro¢ ἐχ- 

poc καταργεῖται ὁ ϑάνατος. “Eoyarog 
is an adjective used for an adverb of time. 
(Jeur. gr. gram. 3714, 2, Ὁ). Accordingly we 
should perhaps better translate: ‘‘ Lastly, death, 
the enemy, shall be destroyed.” TYNDALE: 
«‘And at the laste, death, the enemy, schal be 
distried.””’ Rarims: ‘And the enemie death 
shal be destroied last.”*] This enemy is 
destroyed when the resurrection is com- 
plete. By this event the power of death is 
forever annulled, and there is no such thing 
more as dying or being dead. Death is here 
personified as in Rev. xx. 14. He is termed an 
enemy, inasmuch as he entered as a disturbing 
force into the original constitution of God, which 
was one of pure life and the unfolding of life. 
Moreover, in the Jestruction of death, the devil, 
—he who has the power of death—is rendered 
utterly powerless, as it were, in his last bulwark, 
and incapacitated for any injurious reaction 
upon the kingdom of God. But from this fact 
we are by no means justified in identifying death 
and the devil, as Usteri does. 

That all hostile powers are finally done away, 
is still further established (ver. 27).—For he 
hath put all things under his feet.—The 
argument is either this, ‘‘He hath put everything 
under Him, hence also death;’”’ or, more indi- 
rectly, ‘‘Inasmuch as God hath subjected every 
thing to Him, by this means a perfect harmony 

as been established, which would not be possi- 
ble, unless death were done away.”” The apostle 
here introduces, without any formula of citation, 
words taken from Ps. viii. 7. (1xx. “πάντα ὑπέταξας 
ὑποκάτω τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ." ‘*Thou hast put all 
things under his feet.’’) That he intended these 
words as a quotation, is seen from what follows. 
What the Psalmist said in relation to man whom 
God had endowed with divine majesty and worth, 
and established as lord over this lower creation, 
is referred anagogically by Paul to that person in 
whom theidea of humanity is perfectly realized ; 
and in so doing he takes the word “all,” on 
which the emphasis rests, in its most comprehen- 
sive sense. [‘‘This may be called the hidden 
meaning of the Psalm, because it never would 
have been discovered without a further revela- 
tion, such as we find in the exposition given by 
the inspired apostles.” Hopar]. To under- 
stand ‘“‘God” as the subject here was, in part, 
very possible, (‘‘since, indeed, He is the One 
who works through all things,” NEAnveER), and, 
in part, very natural, because of the obvious 





*(We here give R. Hall’s criticism, which is worthy of 
note in this connection. “It may not beimproper toremark 
that there is an inaccuracy in our common version, which 
80 vitiates its application that it does not seem to sustain 
the conclusion to which the Apostle had arrived. It was 
his purpose to establish the perfection of our Saviour’s con- 
quest, the advancement of his triumphs, and the prostration 
of all enemies, whatever beneath his power. Now to say 
that “the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death,” by 
no means affords a proof of this position. Though death 
might be destroyed, and he the last enemy that should be 
destroyed, it would not thence appear but that other ene- 
mies might remain not destroyed. But the proper render- 
ing is, “ Death, the last enemy, shall be destroyed ”’). 


suggestion of the text of the Psalm.—He now 
turns back to the subject of the surrender of 
the kingdom, showing more fully that it included 
also the subjection of Christ himself. But before 
exhibiting this point positively, he obviates an 
unsuitable extension of the word ‘‘all,” as though 
God himself might be included therein. This 
exception he states as something self-evident, 
and then introduces the positive counterpart.— 
But when he shall have said,—dérav δὲ 
ἐίπη; the subject here is God. The point in- 
tended is differently interpreted. Some take it 
that Paul here meant to explain the language of 
Scripture, and to obviate any misconception in 
regard toit, so that the word ‘‘said”’ refers back 
to the Scriptural expression, which is thus desig- 
nated as a declaration of God himself. (Comp. 
on vi. 16.) In this case, “when” (ὅταν) would 
be equivalent to, ‘in so far as,’ or, ‘in that,’ g.d., 
‘in that he said.’ Others, like Meyer, regard it 
as an expansion of the thought, and as designa- 
ting a future point of time, ‘when he shall have 
declared,’ 7. e., has publicly announced that the 
subjection has been complete, and the work of 
Christ finished,—that all things have been 
subjected,—Since this yields a good sense, it 
is not necessary to deviate from the ordinary use 
of ‘‘ when,” which prevails in the context.—it 
is evident that—We are here to supply, ‘all 
things have been subjected,—excepting him 
who subjected all things to him.—This 
observation might be attributed to the germs of 
the Gnostic view, which elevated Christ above 
the Father as an imperfect Ὁ, T. God. It is, 
however, unnecessary to suppose such a refer- 
ence; and the remark may have also a purely. 
dialectic significance, as implying, ‘so far from 
this expression meaning, that God should be in- 
cluded in the ‘‘all,” that, on the contrary, when 
he shall have said: all things have been subjected, 
the exception is manifest,’ etc-—And when all 
things shall have been subdued unto 
him, then shall the Son also himself be 
subject to him,—The verbs ὑποταγῇ and 
ὑποταγήσεται may be both taken as middle, 
subject themselves, only with this difference, that 
in the former case the subjection is one grounded 
in the consciousness of a perfect weakness, and 
in the latter case, as an act of the highest wil- 
lingness; or both verbs may be passive, be sub- 
dued, only with the distinction that in the former 
case the subjection is one of constraint, and in 
the latter of free self-determination. Both inter. 
pretations amount to the same thing. The self- 
subjection of the Son coincides with that surren- 
der of the kingdom mentioned in ver. 24; and 
we must here either limit the idea of the Son to 
the human nature of Christ, from doing which 
the expression ‘‘the Son also himself,” is suffi- 
cient to restrain us; or we must refer it to the 
church, the mystical body of Christ, for doing 
which, xii. 12 gives us no justification on ac- 
count of the diversity of the expressions, ‘*Son”— 
“Christ ;” nor yet are we warranted in inter- 
preting the self-subjection into the perfect one- 
ness of thought (πολλή ὁμόνοια) between the Son 
and the Father, or into a manifestation of His 
dependence on God in respect to His glory. The 
Apostle here points to one of the deep things of 
the Godhead, viz., that the coequal Son, who is 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 891 





Himself essentially God, even when at the high- 
est point of His glory, subjects Himself, with all 
that has been subdued under Him, unto the 
Father, choosing even in His majesty as Lord of 
all to be dependant upon the Father wholly and 
forever. The title Son is given to Christ in our 
epistle, in only one other passage. ‘‘Christ 
gives the power conferred on Him, back into 
His Father’s hands, not to possess it no more, 
but in order to possess it again, as He possessed 
it in communion with the Father, from all eter- 
nity, before the foundations of the world were 
laid.” Bureer. ‘The historic Christ, as such, 
is perpetually distinguished from God. Christ 
will subject Himself, yet not in the same way as 
He subjected His enemies.” Neanprer. [‘: The 
subjection here spoken of is not predicated of 
the eternal Logos, the second person of the 
Trinity, any more than the kingdom spoken of 
in ver. 24, is the dominion which belongs essen- 
tially to Christ as God. As there the word 
Christ designates the Theanthropos, so does the 
word Son here designate, not the Logos as such, 
but the Logos as incarnate.” Hover]. The 
adjuncts ‘‘also himself,’ serve to set forth more 
prominently the exalted character of the Son. 
[‘‘ Himself’—voluntarily. ‘‘ Himself’? is con- 
trasted with ‘all things,” so that it denotes the 
infinite excellence of the Son; and besides, as 
often, it signifies something voluntary; for the 
Son subordinates Himself to the Father; the 
Father glorifies the Son.” Brnecut]. That by 
this subordination the Trinity itself becomes, as 
it were, dissolved, is a very strange assertion 
(de Wette); on the contrary, the absolute unity 
in the distinction of persons will only become 
the more entirely, conspicuous. Now comes the 
final clause with which this survey concludes, 
stating the object to be obtained —in order 
that God may be the all things in all.— 
This statement is used as the main authority for 
the support of the doctrine of a final restoration 
of all things. The expression, “be the all 
things,” signifies primarily absolute supremacy, 
or rule, [without the intervention of mediators 
or subordinates, such as acted with a sort of 
delegated authority under God in the mediatorial 
kingdom.] But how are we to understand the 
other expression—‘‘in all?”’ Is the adjective to 
be construed as masculine or neuter? On the 
former supposition its scope must be limited to 
believers, members of the kingdom that has been 
hitherto ruled by Christ (Meyer); and this en- 
tirely excludes the doctrine of restoration. On 
the other supposition, all created existences must 
be here understood, in which God will be the all 
determining power,—hence, also Satan and his 
angels included; and thus with this will come 
the cessation of damnation, and so the resto- 
ration of all things. But could the Apostle 
Paul, who puts the lost in contrast with the 
saved, as he does in i. 18 (comp. Phil. iii. 
19), have had such a doctrine in mind? 
Still less indeed could he have intended any pan- 
theistic absorption of all creatures in God, and 
80 the annihilation of all distinct personality, 
since this is already opposed by the doctrine of 
the resurrection. If we take the words ‘‘in all” 
in a narrower sense it is natural to include in 
them also the angels (comp. Eph. i. 10), and to 
21 











suppose not only the absolute supremacy cf the 
divine will among them, but also an absolute 
communication and perfect revelation of the di- 
vine love, as intended. In both these things to- 
gether there is included the complete manifesta- 
tion of God’s glory. According te Rom. viii. 19 
ff. the expression ‘‘in 811 might be extended to 
the entire irrational creation making the adjec- 
tive neuter. The immediate context however 
does not conduct us to such an interpretation, 
though the idea is in itself correct and appro- 
priate. Neander explains the thought thus: 
‘that God may work with all things without the 
intervention of a Mediator.”—If we take the 
expression ‘in all” in its widest sense, inclu- 
ding therein also beings until then hostile te 
God, then we might with Calvin explain the ex- 
pression ‘‘be all,” so far as it bears on such 
parties to imply ‘that in their destruction the 
glory of God will be conspicuous.” But al- 
though we may variously modify and limit the 
words ‘be all’ according to the various capaci- 
ties or receptivities of the creatures contem- 
plated, yet we cannot include in it both the idea 
of glorification as shown in the highest self-com- 
munication of the Deity and also that which is 
shown in the destruction of the creature; and 
only when we look away from the subjective 
side, or have in view the absolutely objective 
universal sovereignty of God can we take the 
words ‘in all’ in this comprehensive sense, so 
that in reference to beings that are hostile to 
God there will be meant here the removal of all 
opposition on their part and their absolute im- 
potence. But the question is, whether in setting 
forth the consummation of the ways of God, or 
of His entire economy, such an interpretation of 
the expression ‘be all’ suffices?—The problem 
here presented is, so to understand the word de- 
struction (ἀπώλεια) that God’s being ‘all in all’ 
is possible when understood even in the wider 
sense, and not simply as a controlling power in 
the hearts of the faithful; and so to explain the 
being ‘all in all’ that the idea conveyed by the 
destruction of the wicked shall not be altered. 
And it is a question whether this problem has 
been solved in the doctrinal method proposed by 
Beck, according to which the Scripture exhibits 
the destruction (ἀπώλεια) of the lost (unspiritual) 
soul as an ultimate result in which, as a second 
death, the whole being becomes pervaded by 
death, and so the very personality ceases in dy- 
ing; or, in other words, the personal conscious 
life becomes annihilated, although all existence 
itself does not cease (Bibl. Sceelenlehre, pp. 
19, 40). This will then be more accurately con- 
ceived thus; ‘that the kingdom of heaven, by 
means of a regeneration which with the purging 
away of all dross restores a pure state of life, 
obtains for itself a new organization of the hea- 
vens and the earth to be the theatre for the dis- 
play of its own peculiar glory, and so becomes 
an immediate theocracy in the absolute and per-~ 
petual reign of God, without the human media- 
torial form of Christ which had been assumed 
only for a season, but not therefore without His 
distinctive character as a Son which He holds 
in the being of the Triune God, where God is the 
fullness of life in all its purity and perfection in 
all the living. To enter however more fully into 


822 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


---------.-----------»Ο᾿- - - - -ς-ς-ς-Ἐ-Ἐ-.- Ἐ------ὀ-ὀς-ς-ς - .Ὶ 


this subject does not fall within the province of 
exegesis. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1. The Gospel—its historical character. In its 
essential elements the Gospel is not a system of 
abstract truths deduced by reason, but a sum- 
mary of marvellous facts which have occurred in 
the history of the world through the direct in- 
terposition of God, and which were designed for 
man’s salyation. Of these the great central ones 
are the appearing, expiatory death, resurrection 
and ascension of the long foretold Messiah, form- 
ing altogether the good tidings of great joy 
which shall be to all, people. It was mainly in 
the proclamation and attestation of these facts 
that preaching originally consisted; and such 
must ever be one of the chief characteristics of 
evangelical preaching, differencing it from all 
other kinds of discourse. The ground on which 
it relies for acceptance must be, therefore, pri- 
marily of a historical kind—the testimony of 
sound and competent witnesses declaring plainly 
that the facts announced are so as stated. And 
in accordance with this, evangelical faith must 
ever have the form of a cordial belief in the tes- 
timony adduced, and of an acceptance of the facts 
unto the ends contemplated in them. If, then, the 
testimony be such as stands the test of the most 
searching scrutiny, and seems altogether unim- 
peachable, we may go on preaching and believ- 
ing, undisturbed by any objections which human 
science or philosophy may be disposed to make, 
No argument can have available force against 
any stupenduous fact of which it may be said, 
‘thus it was foretold ages ago, and thus it has 
come to pass as witnessed by a large number of 
honest and sane men.” And in regard to such a 
fact we may feel assured that, let objectors argue 
as they may, it will prove its consistency with 
all other facts and truths of the world’s history, 
and will also vindicate its importance by other 
manifestations accordant in dignity and kind 
with itself. It cannot stand alone. If e.g. it 
be a fact that ‘‘Christ died for our sins accord- 
ing to the Scriptures,” there was manifested here 
in human nature a power over death which, as 
happening by itself and for its own sake only, 
must ever remain an inexplicable phenomenon. 
Therein we behold a revelation of Divine Omni- 
potence and Love, which at once inspires hope, 
and seems to render the resurrection of others 
both possible and probable. The inference is 
one which nothing can hinder us from drawing 
and resting in. ‘The main thing which concerns 
us, therefore, isthe certainty of the underlying 
fact; and in regard to this we are not left in 
doubt. The resurrection of Christ is one of the 
best attested events in history. The skepticism 
which discards this must, to be consistent with 
itself, at the same time set at naught all history. 
And the faith which accepts this must, to be 
consistent with itself, accept the whole Gospel 
which centres in Jesus Christ, ‘*who was de- 
clared to be the Son of God with power by the 
resurrection from the dead.”’] 

2. The Resurrection of Christ,—its import and 
bearings. This great fact which, next to that of 
our Lord’s atoning death, formed the main topic 


of the apostle’s preaching, serves at once to il. 
lustrate and confirm the truth of man’s salva 
tion in a two-fold direction. 1. Retrospectively. 
That Christ rose from the dead in fulfilment of 
what He had, in part, hinted, and in part, defi- 
nitely predicted before His death, furnishes 
abundant proof in favor of His incarnation and 
atoning death. Had He remained in the grave 
the conclusion would have been that He was 
nothing less than a false prophet, a betrayer, a 
blasphemer, who had suffered death justly ; but 
then, what an inexplicable riddle his life would 
have been! Besides, how fatal to the faith and 
hope of Christians would such continuance un- 
der the power of death have been! ‘There 
could be no forgiveness of sins through His 
blood, no life, no blessedness through His 
name! To follow Him in self denial and de- 
votion were but to make life more misera- 
ble, and those who died believing in Him 
only perish like all the rest of mankind. But 
now haying in truth arisen to an endless 
life by the power of God, He appears before as 
God’s Holy One who could not see corruption—is 
the servant of the Lord, who, in his death, has 
been commissioned to bear our sins—as the 
righteous One who, having made His soul an 
offering for sin, would still prolong His days 


and see His seed, and through His knowledge — 


justify many—as the Son to whom the Father 
hath given to have life in himself, and so could 
impart life to others—in short, as the one who 
is to abide forever as ‘“*the Way, the Truth and 
Life.” 2. Prospectively, in relation to what must 
yet happen for the fulfilment of God’s gracious 
consel. Through Christ, as the risen One, 
death, the wages of sin, is essentially destroyed. 
It has been so already, in so far as by 
His resurrection the atoning power of His 
death has been sealed. But it will be so still 
move, in so far as He, the Head of a new 
humanity, redeemed and restored to God, had 
passed out from under that death in which He 
had suffered the judgment of sin for all, into an 
imperishable life, and has thereby, been, as it 
were, setup, both ἐπ humanity and for it, as the 
principle and power of a new life, capable of 
vanquishing death and enduring unto immortal- 
ity, and is now carrying on a most comprehensive 
work, first, znwardly, in creating the new man 
through the regenerating and quickening power 
of His Spirit, and, next, in developing this spir- 
itual life throughout our entire organism. ‘The 
life thus begun and developed, will be manifest, 
first, in those who belong to Him, when he shall 
appear again in glory (this is called the first 
resurrection); and then it will show itself in the 
rest of mankind—so far as through all the rev- 
elations of His life onward to its onward con- 
summation some susceptibility for these can be 
awakened—until the work of redemption is ac- 
complished, and all opposition is vanquished, 
and the power of death is entirely destroyed, 
and a new external realm is organized, suited to 
the inward perfection of the whole mass of 
redeemed men and celestial spirits, who are 
united in Christ as their Head, and in and with 
Him are made absolutely subjected to God—a 
realm pervaded in all its parts by the power of 
the Holy Love of God that is henceforth, to reg- 


ΓΟ 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 


a ee 
nlate all things. All that is not included in this 
new organization will utterly perish through ob- 
stinate resistance, being excluded from all the 
blessed realities of a universe that has entered 
into the Divine life with and in Christ. 

[8. The mediatorial reign of Christ. The risen 
Saviour is declared in the Scriptures to have 
‘ascended on high” and to be ‘“‘set down on the 
right-hand of the throne of the majesty in the 
heavens,” ‘‘ far above all principality, and power, 
and might, and dominion, and every name that 
is named, not only in this age, but also, in that 
which is to come.” His ascension was, there- 
fore, the inauguration into universal sovereignty 
of the incarnate Logos, the God-Man, or Thea- 
thropos—a sovereignty which had indeed been 
prepared for from the beginning, and also had 
been in a measure, exercised in another form 
(for the Word or Logos had been in the world 
before, as a Light which lighteth every man), 
but which was not actually entered upon until 
after the successful achievement of the priestly 
work on which it was conditioned. It was be- 
cause ** He had been found in fashion as a man, 
and had humbled himself, and become obedient 
unto death, even the death of the cross, that 
God exalted Him and gave Him a name above 
every name, that to Him every knee should bow 
and every tongue confess that He was Lord.” 
And the ulterior end of all this was ‘the glory 
of God, the Father.” But, although now reign- 
ing in heaven, it cannot yet be said that His 
kingdom has come, since its glory is not 
manifest. This is an object still to be anticipated 
and prayed for. Meanwhile, a great preparation 
is making for its advent by the ministration 
of the Spirit; and this dispensation willgo on until 
He who has gone to take unto Himself the king- 
dom, shall return in power and great glory, 
gather about Him the servants whom He had 
entrusted with His gifts, and appoint the faithful 
to their larger trusts of dominion underhim. It 
isat this pointthat the Redeemer’s kingdom may 
be fairly said to begin in its perfect form upon 
the earth; as it is then that the proclamation 
will be made, ‘‘ The kingdoms of this world have 
become the kingdom of our Lord and of His 
Christ, and He shall reign unto the ages of 
ages.” What the particular nature of this admin- 
istration will be, this is not the place to discuss. 
But as this reign will have a beginning, and a 
specific object, it is natural to conclude that it 
will also come to an end, when this object shall 
have been accomplished. And that there will bea 
fixed period for its perfect accomplishment, when 
Christ can say ‘‘it is finished,”—just as when 
He made this same solemn declaration on com- 
pleting His work as Mediator and Sacrifice on 
the cross, we have every reason to infer from the 
very fullness of power that dwelt in Him. To 
be ever doing and never to have done, especially 
in such a work as the overthrowing of rebellion, 
would be an imputation upon His all-suffi- 
ciency. We must, therefore, look for a time 
when the object for which He took upon Himself 
our nature shall be accomplished, and the glory 
of His victory shall shine forth in unquestiona- 
ble splendor and majesty At what moment this 
crisis will arrive, we know not; but we know 
that it will not come until after a long series of 








323 


mighty events, both blessed and awful, of the 
nature of which we have some foreshadowing in 
the book of Revelation. The conclusion of all 
these will be the general resurrection, and the 
final judgment which shall determine the ultimate 
destinies of all the righteous and the wicked. 
This will be ‘*the end,’”’ when Christ shall deliver 
up this mediatorial reign unto the Father that 
appointed Him, and God shall rule, just as He 
did before the apostasy of Satan and the fall of 
man, throughout a universe, untroubled by the 
presence of evil and hence not needing the in- 
tervention of a theanthropic Mediator and his 
subordinates. 

Here certain questions arise. (1) What shall be- 
come of the wicked when God isthe * all in all?” 
Shall they be restored? or annihilated? or still 
continue to exist in some place outside the sphere 
of God’s presence and glory? Certainly not 
restored ; for in the general judgment they are 
sentenced to ‘depart’ as ‘‘ cursed into everlast- 
ing fire.” Not annihilated; for then where 
would be the necessity of the everlasting fire? 
We must, therefore, suppose them to be shut up, 
as it were, in some prison house, in some outer 
darkness, where they shall be as if they were, 
not; and neither the sight, nor the hearing, nor 
the influence of them shall, in any way disturb 
the blessedness which shall reign supreme 
throughout the realms of God, the Father, in 
whose presence there will be a fullness of joy 
forever and ever.—(2) What are to be the rela- 
tions of the glorified God-Man unto the people 
whom He has redeemed? That the Logos will 
cast off the nature which He had assumed, and 
become as before the incarnation, can hardly be 
supposed. If not, how will the surrender of the 
kingdom to the Father then affect His previous 
position as the head of the Church ?—Is His sov- 
ereignty over believers to cease, and His follow- 
ers to be brought into any more direct con- 
nection with God the Father, than before? 
The intimations of Scripture in regard to the per- 
petuity of Christ’s Headship hardly allow of such 
asupposition. And yet, a change of administra- 
tion in some sort is very plainly predicted. God 
is to be the ‘all in all” in some special and 
more perfect sense than He was before the sur- 
render. It may be that on the quelling of rebel- 
lion, and on the ingathering of all the redeemed 
(the veil of all mediatorship being removed) there 
will shine forth upon the immediate apprehension 
of saints and angels, as the result of this long 
and wonderful history, far richer displays of the 
Divine wisdom, power and glory, than ever were 
witnessed before, and that in that beatific vision 
their happiness is to be perfected. But on this 
point the wisest course, perhaps, will be to sus- 
pend all speculation,and leave the subject in that 
sublime suggestiveness where the language of 
the apostle leaves it—‘‘God shall be all in all.” ] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarxe:—Vvy. 1, 2. Hep.: Do not forget 
what you so often hear, nor yet adulterate the 
savor of the word. Thousands hear and receive 
not—receive and keep not—keep and feel not 
the word of life. This is the great condemna- 
tion and blindness of these times!—If thou re- 


824 


ceivest the word, then thou art already blessed, 
not only because thou hadst a sure hope of 
blessedness, but also because thou hast within 
thee the earnest of the future world, and with 
this the foretaste of blessedness in thine heart 

Heb. vi. 5).—It is not enough to have begun 
well, if the end does not also accord with the be- 
ginning. He who apostatizes from the faith, 
has believed in vain, and incurs a greater dam- 
nation than if he had never believed (2 Pet. ii. 
21).—Vv. 3, 4. Christ is the center of the Holy 
Scriptures, the foundation of our faith, especi- 
ally in His death for our sins and His resurrec- 
tion for our righteousness. Without the knowl- 
edge of these facts all science is ignorance.— 
The Holy Spirit explains through the apostles 
what He had formerly spoken through the pro- 
phets concerning Christ.—Ver. 5 ff. Upon sor- 
row follows joy: thou weepest because Jesus thy 
Friend has concealed Himself; thou wilt rejoice 
again when He shall reveal Himself unto thee 
(John xvi. 22).—Hast thou sinned, repent; then 
will Jesus appear to you with His grace (Matt. 
xxvi. 75).—Who can doubt the resurrection of 
Christ? It has been confirmed by some hun- 
dreds of witnesses.—Though thou hast not seen 
Jesus the risen One with thine eyes, yet behold 
Him in faith, and thou wilt hereafter be certain 
to behold Him in glory (John xx. 29; 1 Pet. i. 
8).—Ver, 8ff. The grace of God is shown where 
the greatest of sinners are; and such often be- 
come the most edifying preachers, when through 
the grace of God they have been led to cast off 
the yoke of sin (Ps. li. 13).—The sins committed 
before conversion are indeed forgiven ; but they 
leave behind them a troubling remembrance for 
our humiliation, especially when others have 
been scandalized thereby, and the world knows of 
them.—Hep : Humble boasting, holy pride,to say 
toSatan, ‘God has become strong inus!’ But 
what does this word mean in the mouth of the 
godless? Are they partakers of Divine grace? 
Does it work in them to God’s glory ?—Ver. 12 f. 
It is all the same whether we deny the resurrec- 
tion by word or deed. —The articles of our 
Christian faith hang together like a chain. 
When one is broken, the whole is broken. This 
is what makes error so fearful. Let a person 
guard himself at the start, lest he fall from one 
error into another.—Ver.15. Preachers should 
see to it that they do not make themselves false 
witnesses for God by producing lying fables, and 
turning aside from the truth of the Gospel in 
their teachings.—Ver. 16. Those who deride 
the resurrection of the dead are like wild boars 
of the forest who would root up and overturn 
the very foundations of the faith. Butthey will 
not succeed. The truth will stand while they 
perish.—Ver. 17. Faith must lay hold upon 
Christ as a living Saviour, and enter with Him 
into eternal life.—Ver. 19. The simple life of 
the children of this world is indeed more mis- 
erable than the cross-life of believers. Nev- 
ertheless that man is to be deemed the most 
miserable of all, who, while not believing 
in the resurrection of Christ and eternal 
life, yet subjects himself legally to the rules of 
Christianity and endures persecution for its 
sake.—Ver. 20. A true member of Christianity 
who, without any self-deception, carries in him- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





self the witness of his spiritual resurrection has 
no cause tobe afraid of death—no more than 
he has to be afraid of that natural sleep, which 
the weary court for their refreshment.—Throug 
the resurrection of Christ we receive all powe 
unto life, and upon this there follows the full 
harvest of the general resurrection.—Ver. 22. 
Let no one be astonished that weshall all be made 
alive on account of the Lord Jesus: for if one 
man was able to introduce death upon all; why 
should not also one man, who is at the same time 
God, and who makes all things alive, restore 
life to all the dead ?—Ver. 24. Sprener: The 
Lord lays aside His previous sway over His 
kingdom, where he commanded His gospel to 
be preached, and equipped and sent out His 
servants into the work, and poured ont 
His Spirit and His blessing upon the word 
given, in order that men might be con- 
verted, enlightened, regenerated, justified, sanc- 
tified, disciplined by the cross, and protected 
against the devil, and where He now wins over 
him one victory after another—this supremacy 
he lays aside with the public and actual attesta- 
tion in heaven before God and all the angels 
and saints that He had fulfilled His Father’s will, 
and had finished his work; and, together with 
this he will then, astheir Head, present his be- 
lieving ones to the Father as henceforth fully 
blessed and fit for the enjoyment of a perfect 
felicity for ever more. Regnum non cessabit, sed 
modus regnandi per fidem. (Chemnitz ).—Ver. 25 
ff. After Christ has overcome everything in the 
subjects of His kingdom, there yet remains 
Death, who, so long as they lie in their graves, 
still in a certain sense holds them captive; but 
in the resurrection Death too is destroyed, 
and in its place there reigns eternal life (Rev. 
xx. 14; xxi. 4.—Ver. 28. In the surrender of 
his kingdom, Christ, as the God-Man, the Head 
and Mediator of the church, will show also His 
own subjection to the Father.—For the present, 
and so long asthe work of restoration endures, 
Christ is called ‘‘the all in all” (Col. iii. 11); 
but when thesaints are made perfect, and, having 
been freed from allsin and its consequences, are 
surrendered to the Heavenly Father, then, by 
virtue of Christ’s accomplished mediation, will 
the Heavenly Father together with the Son and 
Holy Spirit, become directly ‘the all things in ~ 
all” to them, and fill their understanding with His 
Divine wisdom, their wills with His Divine holi- 
ness, their desires with His Divine sweetness and 
‘joy, their bodies with heavenly glory and delight, 
and, in short, their entire selves wholly with 
Himself forever and ever. Spenser: God will 
then hold converse with His saints without any 
mediation, since they will see Him as He is, and 
He, without obstruction, will have glory over all, 
and shine in all and through all. 

BERLENBURGER Bipet:—Ver. 1f. The Gospel 
must be inwardly received, and for this result 
God must prepare, enlighten, and sanctify the 
heart. This happens when we yield to the Holy 
Spirit. Then the hungry heart receives the 
Word with joy, and learns to behold Jesus and 
His salvation there, because it sees itself to be 
so empty and destitute of grace.—It belongs to 
the proper acceptance of the Word that we learn 


to abide fast in known truth; since the know; 


CHAP. XV. 1-28. 


ledge of our need ever drives us to our own 
hearts, where the Lord Jesus and His holy word 
areimplanted. God’s gift and calling are without 
repentance. God has taken us once for all into 
His care. If we will only abide therein, nothing 
can be wanting to us in the future, for our sal- 
vation will never cost Him more than it did at 
the beginning. For our sakes, however, it is, 
said, ‘‘Hold fast that which thou hast ”’(Rev. 
iii. 11).—The tidings that ‘Christ lives,’ and that 
this brings after it the resurrection of the others 
is so important that, for the sake of it, Paul is 
willing to let every thingelse go. If the truth 
of Christ’s history is not tmwardly confirmed, 
then an hour of temptation may easily come 
when, for many, all foundation in Christ may be 
shaken by reason and unbelief, as well as by the 
assaults of foes.—Ver. 8. When the soul wrestles 
against sin, it will often appear to it as if Christ 
had not died for our sins. But Christ has died, 
and thereby expiated our sins, in order that we, 
being planted together with Him in the likeness 
of His death, may die unto sin, and live unto 
righteousness (1 Pet. ii. 24). We then truly ex- 
perience that Christ was slain for our sins in the 
flesh, when, through His death, our own sin 15 
also daily slain. How can we comfort ourselves 
in the death of Jesus Christ if we still live in 
those sins unto which we must die?—Sharp com- 
punctions of heart in repentance under the law 
are needed, ere we can become fit for, and par- 
ticipate in the super-abundant grace of Christ. 
This pearl belongs only to the pure, and not to 
swinish hearts which trample it under their feet. 
—Ver. 4. Where the new life does not exist, 
there can be no power or certainty in the re- 
surrection of Christ. Indeed, men are rather 
ashamed of it in works, when they confess it 
only with the mouth.—If we believe not the 
power of Christ’s life, then we have neither the 
will nor the power to befree from sin. But if 
such truths are not made known in power, how 
will men be disposed to receive them, and to 
stand therein?—Ver. 5. It was necessary that 
Christ should reveal Himself also as a living one; 
for in so doing He has adapted Himself to our un- 
derstandings; for he, who proposes to impart a 
great light to any one, does this gradually, for 
the sake of those weak eyes which could not en- 
dure a strong light 1>t in upon them at once.— 
The seeing of Christ bodily did not help those 
Jews who believed not. We must therefore know 
Him in Spirit, and learn to recognize Him as pre- 
sent in our hearts.—He must dwell in us by faith, 
speak in us and through us, enlighten, sanctify, 
and purify us, as He needs did it in Paul.—Ver. 9. 
This is what a scholar of Christ learns from his 
Master, when, as a weary one, he comes to the 
“ Lowly in heart,” viz., the deepest humility.— 
Ver. 10. Whatever of good we have or do, is all 
owing to the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. his 
grace, then, by which Christ designs to live in 
us, we should not suffer to remain in us to no 
purpose.—When we are in Jesus, we learn to 
arrogate nothing to ourselves exclusively, but to 
lay the greatest gifts of grace humbly at the feet 
of God, and to be as if we had them not. 
the grace of God must not be suffered to lie idle 
in us. This is an essential part of holiness, to 








Only’ 


825 





Ϊ in casting all crowns, all praise, and honor, and 


glory, at the feet of God and the Lamb, and to 
confess, ‘‘ Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but 
Thine be the praise.”” In this way a soul sinks 
and loses itself in God, who is the source of its 
being, just as a drop of water is merged in the 
great sea, and becomes again what it was in the 
beginning.—Ver. 14. If we have no living Sa- 
viour, whereupon then does the whole Christian 
religion rest? All grace, forgiveness, righteous- 
ness, springs from the resurrection of Christ, and 
is founded thereupon.—Ver. 17. The greatest 
fruit of the resurrection is deliverance from those 
sins for which Christ died. Then does our faith 
become true, and firm, and actual. — Ver. 19. 
Men who long after pleasure and worldly de- 
lights, and riches, and honor, have some actual 
good here; but it is only a seeming good. But 
if Christians, who make the life of God, even 
eternal life, their chief end, and hope for the 
same, and strive after it, have only a hope of it, 
and not the actual enjoyment and the substance 
of it, then are they of all persons the most miser- 
able.—Ver. 25. ‘‘He must reign’’—this is not 
yet fulfilled, but it is in process of consummation, 
and it must pass through many stages ere it comes 
to the end.—Ver. 26. The appropriation of the 
ransom involves the removal of all that which 
deserves to be called death. The full consum-. 
mation of this is indeed to be deferred unto the 
end; but since so much precedes, we cannot 
doubt the result.—Ver. 27. All created things, 
in the end, become subordinate to their rightful 
Lord, and become so subject as to stand under 
Him in whom God had created them in the be- 
ginning.—Ver. 28. The divine subjection of the 
Son of God unto the Father will bring with it 
something more glorious than His previous sove- 
reign rule. Sin andimperfection will no more 
be found in any creature; but every thing will 
be directly ruled by God, each in its own mea- 
sure, just as the humanity of Jesus was ruled by 
His divinity: hence, there will be no more any 
need of governing through the person of a Medi- 
ator.—When God shall become ‘all in all,” and 
when the creatures made subject to God and 
Christ are thoroughly penetrated by the Spirit 
of God in all their being and powers, so that 
they with God, and God with them, shall be- 
come one spirit, then will the future holy and 
righteous world, wherein Christ has ruled, lose 
itself, as it were, in the still all-blessed eternity ; 
yet, it will not thereby pass away, but only enter 
into the sweetest state of peace, where we shall 
know by experience as little of what is meant by 
devil, sin, death, wrath, or hell, as was known 
of these things when as yet all creatures lay con- 
cealed in the eternal creative power of God, or 
when, in the beginning of their creation, they 
were all alike very good.—O, what a depth of 
riches, wisdom, righteousness, mercy, and love 
in God! 

Heupner :—Ver. 1f. In regard to every new 
doctrine that is propounded, we must inquire 
first whether it is consistent with the original 
apostolic doctrine, and whether we have reason 
for changing the old faith. Thoughtlessly to 
change our faith is a matter which touches our 
salvation. An unchanging adherence to primi- 


unite with the holy and the glorified in heaven | tive Christianity must be a fundamental principle 


826 





with the Christian; he who objects to this, 
ceases to be one.—Ver. 8 f. Christianity is: 1. 
established upon accredited facts; 2. exceeding- 
ly simple. Itssumis: 1. the atonement through 
Christ ; 2. the divine acceptance of it proved by 
the resurrection; and 8. the fruit of redemption, 
viz., our future glory. If Christ’s death purifies 
us from sins, justifies us, and obligates us to die 
unto sin, so does His burial show us how we 
should conceal ourselves from the world, and 
avoid its temptations; and the resurrection gives 
us new eternal life, that we may long after 
heavenly things and strive to obtain them.—Ver. 
9. In all that we have become through God, we 
should never forget what we once were. The 
greater our former humiliation, the more won- 
derful the height to which God raises us.—Ver. 
10. The humble recognition of divine grace 
characterizes all saints. —Humility does not re- 
quire the ignoring of what we are, and what we 
have performed; but we must give God the 
honor.—Luruer: “ΟΥ̓ myself I have enough to 
humble and crush me; but on and in God I have 
reason to be proud, and to be glad at His gifts, 
and to rejoice, and triumph, and boast. But it 
is all to the praise and glory of God.” Without 
humility, high achievements, distinguished suc- 
cess and labors bring us into great danger, and 
make us the more guilty before God. 

W. F. Besser :—Ver. 2. All, all is given to us 
by the grace of God. He calls us through the 
gospel; He works faith; He makes us happy in 
the fellowship of His dear son, and ποὺ so much 
forces us into such happiness as keeps us back 
from the iniquity, and the unfaithfulness, and 
the unthankfulness of those who refuse the gos- 
pel (Heb. xii. 25), or who turn from it after they 
have received it.—Vy. 2-4. Preserve us, O Lord, 
by thy Word! Grant us such a hearing of the 
Word that we may derive from its proclamation 
a clearer knowledge of its chief facts, the proper 
seat and fountain of gospel life, and may look 
ever more profoundly, even to the very founda- 
tion whereon our salvation is based. 

Vers. 1-20. Pericope for Easter. 1: The 
Christian’s faith is a well-grounded one; it rests, 
a. upon our own experience of its beatific power 
(vv. 1,2); b. upon Christ’s holiness and truth, 
confirmed by His death and resurrection (8); ὁ. 
upon several divine confirmations of the mission 
of Jesus, among which the resurrection is the 
chief, established by many witnesses (4-7); ἃ. 
upon the continual operations of Christianity 
(the conversion of Paul, the spread of Christi- 
anity), which are evidently a work of divine 
grace (8-10). 2. The progressive stages of Chris- 
tian faith. a. The knowledge of the gospel from 
its preaching, which one has often heard and 
considered (1), and has understood as to its 
great object (2); b. a firm conviction of the 
truth of the history of Jesus, His death and res- 
urrection; 6. experience of the power of the 
grace of God in one’s own heart, which sheds a 
light in the soul (8); and puts us to shame, and 
discloses our former hostility to God (9); but 
also creates us anew unto good works (10). 3. 
The close connection hetween doctrine and history in 
Christianity. On vv. 8, 4, compare Dr. Stein- 
kopf in ‘‘ One Lord, one faith,” p. 189f. Three 
chief pillars of the Christian faith. a. Christ’s 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





death for our sins sweetens to every believer that 
death which appears so fearful to the unbeliever 
or formal Christian. b. His burial and rest in 
the grave eclaircises the view of the Christian as 
he looks into the grave so dark and fearful. ὁ. 
His victorious resurrection has stamped upon 
the Saviour’s person a doctrine and word the 
seal of divinity, and is the sure pledge of our 
resurrection. On ver. 10th see Harm’s ‘‘ Winter- 
postille.” Man’s work, without God’s grace, is, 
a. low, bad and vain; b. through, with, and in 
God's grace itis glorious, righteous, and endu- 
ring.— Ver. 13. In all the propositions which we 
receive, we should consider their bearings upon 
faith.—Ver. 17 ff. He who takes from us faith 
in Christ, snatches away all consolation. The 
Christian faith, without a future life, is a thing 
most irrational and comfortless; since Christi- 
anity would then impose upon its confessors the 
severest self-denials, conflicts and sacrifices, and 
in earthly things insure us nothing; and Chris- 
tians would then cleave to a deceptive image, 
and contemn the only real thing which remains 
to them. Earthly life, without its consumma- 
tion in eternity is a vain sport.—Ver. 20. The 
resurrection of Christ as the entrance into an 


eternal, indestructible life, is the pledge of eter- 


nal life for us—not simply a proof for the possi- 
bility of our resurrection.—Ver. 22. Our mor- 
tal first parent begat mortal men. Christ has 
the right and the power to quicken all again; 
this happens through our spiritual union with 
Him.—Ver. 24 ff. The history of Christ will not 
come to its end for along time. The most im- 
portant thing is stillin advance.—So long as the 
Messianic kingdom stands, God’s glory is medi- 
ately bound to thiseconomy. Every thing which 
God does, He does through the Messiah. This 
economy, when it has fulfilled its object, will 
give place to the immediate reign of God. God, 
as Lord and Father, will reign immediately over 
all, and impart Himself directly to all, without 
the intervention of a mediator. The use of the 
Scriptures, and of the sacraments, will cease, 
because no more needed.—Ver. 26. The victory 
which Christ has achieved over death: a. What 
death had been for us without His resurrection. 


ὁ. How Christ has conquered him through His — 


resurrection. 

[1.- Barrow:—Ver. 8. The death of Christ. 1. 
Its nature—a true and proper death. 2. Some 
peculiar adjuncts, which commend it to our re- 
gard as being, a. a result of God’s eternal de- 
cree; 5. a matter of free consent and compact 
between the Father and Son; 6. anciently pre- 
figured and predicted; d. executed by God’s 
hand and providence; man concurring; 6, the 
death of a person so holy and so excellent. 3. 
The principles and impressive and meritorious 
causes thereof. a. It originated in the love of 
God the Father, and in the love of the Son. 4. 
The ends aimed at, its fruits and effects. a. 
The illustration of God’s glory. 6. The digni- 
fying and exalting of the Lord Jesus. c. The sal- 
vation of mankind. 5. The practical influences 
which its consideration should have; a. should 
beget the highest degree of love and gratitude 
toward God and Christ; ὁ. should excite in us 
great faith and hope in God; c. should comfort 
us and satisfy conscience in regard to guilt; ὦ 


᾿ 
να ἐδ ΟΝ, 


CHAP. XV. 29-34. 





should discover unto us the heinousness of our 
sins; 6. should work in us kindly contrition and 
remorse; f. should deter us from the repetition 
of sins; g. should engage us to patient submis- 
sion and resignation to God’s will; h. should 
oblige us to the deepest mortification in con- 
formity to Christ’s death; ὁ. should engage us 
to the fullest measure of charity toward our 
brethren; 7. should bind us to yield us up wholly 
to the service of our Saviour. ] 

R. Stier :—Vvy. 1-10.—The three pillars of our 
faith. 1. Scripture—giving the account of 
Christ beforehand. 2, History—proving Scrip- 
ture fulfilled. 8, The effects of grace in con- 
verting the bitterest of foes, such as Paul. 

[I. Newron:—Ver. 20. The Lord is risen, in- 
deed; as proven by reliable testimony. 1. The 
witnesses were competent judges of what they 
asserted, as is evident: a. from their numbers; 
ὃ. from the nature of the fact. 2. They were 
faithful andgupright witnesses. a. Their wri- 
tings proved them well meaning. ὦ. Had no 
advantage to gain. ὁ. They met with success 
such as God only could give. 3. There is be- 
sides the witness of an ever-present Spirit, which 
takes of the things of Christ, and shows them to 
us. 

, Isip:—Vy. 21-22. Death by Adam, life by 








327 





Christ. 1. The malady. a. Death moral. 4, 
Death natural. c. Death eternal. 2. The cure. 
a. Deliverance from condemnation. ὦ. Deliver- 
ance from the power of sin. 6. Deliverance 
from the fear and power of death. d. Eternal 
blessedness and glory. 

A. Burter:—Ver. 22. . The power of the resur- 
rection of Christ. 1. A great public manifestation 
of His authority over the power of physical de- 
cay anddeath. 2, This power exercised with a 
view to the beings He came to redeem. 8. Con- 
sequently, the resurrection power did not cease 
after Christ’s departure, but, on the contrary, it 
was not till then adequately in action. 4. The 
final consummation of the resurrection work to 
be greatly desired. 

R. Hati:—Vv. 26. Death, the last enemy, 
shall be destroyed. 1. Nature of this enemy, and 
why called the last. 2. The manner and the 
successive stages in which our Lord has already 
conquered in part, and wlll completely conquer 
this last enemy. 

Η. Metvitn:—The termination of the media- 
torial kingdom. 1. Christ is now vested with a 
kingly authority, which He must hereafter re- 
sign. 2. Asa consequence of this resignation, 
God himself will become allin all to the uni- 
verse]. 


Refutation of the tmpugners of the resurrection of the dead (2) from the inconceivableness of certain 
. facts, except on its supposition. | 


CHAP. XV. 29-34. 


Else what shall they do which are baptized [have themselves baptized, of βαπτιζόμε- 
vot] for the dead, if the dead rise not [are not raised, οὐχ ἐγείρονται] atall? why are 
they then baptized [do they have themselves baptized, βαπτίξονται) for the dead? 
[om. the dead. ins. them, αὐτῶν] And why stand we in jeopardy every hour? 
I protest by your? rejoicing [by the boasting which I have concerning you,’ brethren, 
νὴ τὴν ὑμετέραν xabynow, adedgot*] which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. 
If after the manner of men [with the views of common men, χατὰ ἄνϑρωπον] I have 
[om. have] fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise 
not? let [me? If the dead rise not, let] us eat and drink; for to-morrow we die. 
Be not deceived: evil communications [associations, du:Aéat] corrupt good manners 
[useful habits, ἤϑη χρηστὰ]. Awake to righteousness [awake at once, as it is right, 
ἐχνήφατε dtxatws], and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak® this 
to your shame. 


32 


33 
34 


1 Ver, 29.—The Rec. has τῶν νεκρῶν instead of αὐτῶν, but the reading is feebly attested. [It has forit D. (3rd hand), L. Syr. 
(Pesch.) Chrys. Theodt. Oecum. Theophyl. and Jacob (Nisib.); but against it A. B. Ὁ. (1st hand), E. F. K. Sinait. 20 cur- 
sives, Ital. Vulg. Goth. Copt. Basm. Syr. (later), Arm. Orig. and several Greek and Latin writers. Alford calls it a me- 
chanical repetition of the last words of the preceding clause,—C. P. W.] 

2 Ver. 31.—Others have ἡμετέραν. Meyer thinks that ὑμετέραν was not understood, and ἡμετέραν seemed demanded by 
nv ἔχω. It has however, the weight of evidence against it. 

$Ver. 31.—The Rec. leaves out ἀδελφοί with D. Εἰ. F. G. L. several Ital. versions, the later Arm. Orig. Chrys. Theodt. 
Damasc. Ambrst.; but A. B. K. Sinait. Vulg. Syr. (both) Goth. Basm. Arm. Aeth. Arab. and Slay. Dial. Aug. Pel. Bede in. 
sert it. Some of these add μον. C. P. W.] 

(* Ver. 33.—The Rec. has χρῆσθ᾽, and Lachmann edits χρήσθ᾽ but they have no good MSS to support them. Clemens 
Alex. and Amphilochius (of Leon.) have the word thus abbreviated to constitute with the previous syllable a spondee; in 
dur passage read as an iambic trimeter acataletic, which the Latins callsenarius. Winer, Gram. of the N. T.% 68.—C. P.W.] 

5 Ver. 34— Lachmann and Tischendorf have λαλῶ. The Rec. gives λέγω on equally good authority. tite former is 
sustained by B. Ὁ. E. Sinait. Dial. Several Latin versions and Armbrst. have loquor. The latter is fayored by A. F. G. K. 
L., Chrys. Theodt, The Vulg.(Flor.) and two Latin and one Vulg. MSS. have dico—C. P. W.] 


328 





EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 29.—HElse what shall they do, — The 
connection here with what precedes involves 
some difficulties. [AsStanley remarks: ‘it is 
one of the most abrupt to be found in St. Paul’s 
Epistles. He leaves the new topic just at the 
moment when he has pursued it, as it were, to 
the remotest point, and goes back to the general 
argument as suddenly as if nothing had inter- 
vened. The two instances most similar are v. 9, 
ii. 6,8; 2 Cor. vi. 14; vii. 1. Here, as there, 
the confusion may possibly have arisen from 
some actual interruption in the writing or the 
material of the letter; the main argument pro- 
ceeding continuously from ver. 20 to ver. 29, and 
the whole intervening passage being analogous 
to what in modern composition would be called 
anote”’]. Inasmuch as πε ΐ, since, ordinarily 
indicates a connection with what immediately 
precedes, Meyer insists upon our interpreting it 
so here, g. d., ‘for if there is nothing in this de- 
velopment of human history onward to the end, 
when God shall be all in all, then what shall 
they do, etc.’ Such a construction can be 
maintained only in so far as we regard the re- 
surrection as the chief event in this final con- 
summation. Neander, on the contrary, says: 
‘““We must suppose a digression to begin at ver. 
22, since, at that point, there opened upon the 
Apostle’s view a prospect of the whole process 
of the world’s development proceeding from the 
redemption of Christ. He started with the idea 
of the necessary connection which the resurrec- 
tion to eternal life has with Christianity; and 
with this he now proceeds.” [The ellipsis here 
may be thus supplied: ‘The dead are certainly 
to be raised, else what shall they do, ete.’ 
(Honae) ; or, inserting it after “else,” ‘if it be 
asthe adversaries suppose, what, etc.’ (Alford)]. 
—The question here suggests the utter useless- 
ness of the practice he is about to adduce in con- 
firmation of his position. ‘‘Every baptism that 
you perform in behalf of the dead, would be 
without meaning, if those who deny the resur- 
rection were in the right. He indicates the sub- 
jective absurdity of the proceeding in this case.” 
Meyer.—who are baptized for the dead, 
—How are we to understand these words? The 
simplest explanation of the act here spoken of 
is, the suffering of one’s self to be baptized for 
the benefit of deceased persons, or in their stead, 
so as to redound to their advantage, 7. e., that the 
salvation mediated by baptism, might fallto their 
lot, so that those who themselves died unbap- 
tized, might pass for baptized, and thus have 
part in the resurrection and in the kingdom of 
Christ. A custom of this sort is discoverable in 
subsequent times; yet, however, only among 
heretical sects, such as the Cerinthians and the 
Marcionites (comp. Epiph. haer. 28, 3; Tertull. 
de resurr. 48; adv. Marc. 5,10; Chriss. i. h. 1.). 
The article before νεκρῶν, dead, points to defi- 
nite cases (‘for the dead’ in question). ‘* We might 
imagine that many, having come to the exercise 
of faith, resolved to receive baptism, but died 
ere the rite could be performed. This was so 
much the more likely to have been the case, inas- 
u.ach as according to xi. 80, there was an epi- 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


-- -.ὄ 


demic prevalent. If, then, ἃ τοϊδεϊνο had suffered 
himself to be baptized in the conviction that he 
was only doing what the deceased would have 
done had he survived, the proceeding would not 
have been quite so superstitious.” NEANDER. 
But it is probable that this custom could have 
sprung up so early, and could have been men- 
tioned by the Apostle without disapproval, when 
it was so inconsistent with his fundamental 
views of faith and of its efficiency for the at- 
tainment of salvation ?—The latter, indeed, is 
perhaps supposable, since he has here primarily 
to do only with the testimony which might be 
adduced from an actual occurrence; respecting 
the relation of which, however, to the truth, 
there was no need of his explaining himself.* 
Bisping considers the use of the third person 
(‘‘ what shall they do’’) as an indirect intimation 
of disapproval. [Andso Alford: ‘There is in 
these words a tacit reprehension of the practice 
which itis hardly possible altogéther to miss. 
Both by the third person and by the article before 
Pant. he indirectly separates himself and those 
to whom he is writing from participation in, or 
approval of the practice.’ He translates οἱ 
βαπτιζόμενοι ‘those who are in the habit of 
being baptized,’ not οἱ βαπτίσϑεντες. The dis- 
tinction, he says, is important as affecting the 
interpretation]. Indeed, that Paul, as well as 
the other apostles, exercised a counteracting in- 
fluence upon this custom, may be inferred from 
the fact that it afterwards vanished out of the 
orthodox church, and was perpetuated only 
among heretics. Itis bymo means improbable, 
that the high estimation of baptism, at so early 
a period, had acquired a superstitious taint. 
Since the deeply-rooted heathenish notion of the 
magical influence of sacred rites might easily 
have been preserved, or at least, have re-ap- 
peared, among those of whom the Apostle 
asserts that they were yet carnal, and who took 
so low a position in their estimate of spiritual 
gifts. This view is to be maintained all the more 
decidedly from the circumstance that all other 
views are, in part, opposed to the ordinary use of 
terms, and in part, improbable, and arbitrary 
on other grounds. But what we have adduced 
cannot well be questioned.—Proceeding from the 


signification of ὑπέρ here pre-supposed, viz: 


in behalf of, Olshausen could have interpretated 
it to imply that it was done for the benefit of the 
dead, in so far as a definite number (pleroma) 
must needs be baptized ere the second advent 


* [In similar style Hodge accounts for Paul’s appeal to a 
wrong custom. “This method of arguing against others 
from their own concessions, is one which the Apostle fre- 
quently employs. When his mind is full of a particular 
subject, he does not leave it, to pronounce judgment on 
things incidentally introduced. Thus, in chap. xi. 5, when 
treating of women speaking in the church unveiled, he 
expresses no disapprobation of their speaking in public, 
although he afterwards condemned it. A still more strik- 
ing example of the same thing is to be found x. 8, where he 
speaks of the Corinthians “sitting at meat in an idol’s 
temple,” without any disapprobation of the thing itself, but 
only of its influence on the weaker brethren. Yet, in x. 
14-22, he proves that the thing itself was an act of idolatry. 
The entire disappearance of this custom in the orthodox 
church, although other superstitious observances, not less 
objectionable, soon prevailed, is probably to be referred to 
the practice, having been forbidden by the Apostle as soon 
as he reached Corinth. This may have been one of the 
things which he left to be set in order when he came 
xi. 84. 


« 


CHAP. XV. 29-34. 
ee SE er ee Ee ee 


and resurrection could ensue; but this view 
appears in itself questionable, since there is 
nothing in the context intimating it, and it 
inclines to another signification of words, viz: 
‘instead of the dead,’ 7. e., to fill up the gap made 
by these deceased. But this interpretation 
would be devoide of significance, and also, in 
respect to the use of language, very doubtful. 
Luther’s translation, ‘‘ over the dead,” 7. e., over 
their graves, is opposed: 1. by the N. T. use 
of language which no where takes ὑπέρ with the 
genitive in a local sense; 2. by a lack of all 
historical trace of any such burial ceremony in 
apostolic times. Still lessadmissible is the ex- 
planation that applies it to the baptism of the 
Clinici, those upon the bed of death, jamjam 
moriturt (Estius), or, gquum mortem ante oculos 
positam hebeant (Bengel) ; since the words could 
not mean this, and besides we hear nothing of 
the baptism of the Clinici at this time. Equally 
untenable is the reference of the words ‘in 
behalf of the dead” to Christ (the plural here 
being taken in a general sense to designate the 
category [as Wordsworth, ]; since water-baptism 
would require the preposition εἰς, and to the blood- 
baptism no allusion whatever can be found in 
the context, and the word is never used in this 
sense by Paul. Besser interprets still differently : 
‘‘Not a few heathen [convinced by the sight of 
a believer’s triumph over death] would allow 
themselves to be baptized. for the sake of those 
deceased ones whom they had seen to depart in 
peace and joy—and before the dying beds and 
graves over which there seemed to flourish an 
unfading hope; in order to pass from death 
into life in company with those who slept in 
Christ.” Here ὑπέρ is taken in the sense of, 
on account of, because of, [not, to their advantage, 
but, out of admiration, or love for them], as in 
Rom. xy. 9. ‘That the Gentiles might glorify 
God for (ὑπέρ) his mercy ; as it is written, For 
this cause 1 will confess to thee among the Gentiles 
and sing unto thy name.’’* 

[The most favorite interpretation for the last 
half century is that of Lightfoot and Rosenmiil- 
ler, adopted by Robinson in his Lexicon, which 
takes BarreCémevorin the sense of ‘being 
immersed in sufferings,’ as parallel to ‘ being in 
jeopardy,’in the next clause. Referring to 
Mark x. 33, 39, and Luke xii. 50, it takes ὑπέρ 
in the sense of évexa, and τῶν νεκρῶν for death. 
The complete meaning of the words then would 
be, ‘those who have been overwhelmed with 
calamities, trials and sufferings; in the hope of 
the resurrection or with the expectation that the 
dead would rise.’ But the objections to this 
view are that the words are here taken in an 
unusual and unnatural sense, to which we are 
not to resort, unless compelled by some most 
evident reason; and also, the ellipsis implied is 
much too harsh to be admitted. Bloomfield and 


* (See this view wrought out with great originality and 
convincing argument by the Rey. H. D. Ganse, in the Amer. 
Pres. and Theo. Review, 1863, p. 83. It merits the preference 
over all others, because, while answering all the require- 
ments of grammar, and conceding to each word its full and 
proper meaning, it rests on a natural hypothesis and relieves 
us of the difficulty of supposing that the Apostle here 
appeals for support to a practice wholly at variance with his 
fundamental doctrines. The whole article merits attention 
as a masterly specimen of exegesis, and as illustrating other 
points in this chapter with great beauty and force.] 








829 








Barnes follow the interpretation of Chrys., and 
the early Greek Fathers, supported by Hammond 
and Wetstein, which takes the baptism here 
alluded to as that which is applied to all believers, 
who, in receiving the rite, witness to their faith 
in the resurrection of the dead. Here an ellip- 
sis of the word ‘‘resurrection”’ is presupposed. 
The great objection to this view is, that in this 
case the persons alluded to, instead of being, as 
they obviously are, a distinct class inthe church, 
are the whole body of believers, leaving us no- 
thing special here as the ground of the Apostle’s 
appeal]. The latest attempt now only remains 
to be mentioned (Theol. Stud. und Krit. 1860. 1. 
S. 135 ff.) There we have the interpretation, 
‘¢why should a person suffer himself to be bap- 
tized on account of the dead,’’z. 6., to belong to 
them, to come to them, so,as to form a kingdom 
of the dead? However easy and simple this may 
appear, yet such an interpretation of the phrase 
Bart. ὑπέρ τῶν νεκρῶν is an artificial one, 
and not sufficiently well grounded. Properly it 
should read, ‘ who are baptized on account of the 
resurrection and in the hope of the same; be- 
cause death, or coming into the kingdom of the 
dead, was the only thing to be anticipated with- 
out any further hope for this life. Something 
similar to this appears in Chrys., Theod. and 
others. Other interpretations may as well be 
passed over. [Fora full list of these, see Pool’s 
synopsis and also Notes by Stanley and Barnes 
on this text].—The correct parallelism requires 
that the next clause, which in the Ree. is 
connected with that just considered, should be 
joined with what follows.—if the dead rise not 
at all?—6”Awcasiny. 1.—why are they even 
yet baptized for them ?—x ai is intensive, 
still, evenyet. The meaning is, [if we adopt the 
explanation first maintained above, ] in this case 
nothing at all could be accomplished for the 
dead; it is therefore, perfectly useless any lon- 
ger to submit to baptism in their behalf.’ 

Vers. 30-34. As asecond argument in his apo- 
gogical demonstration he refers to the perilous 
self-deyotion and the hazards of martyr-death 
which wereincurred by himself and his associates. 
The utter uselessness and folly of such conduct, in 
case the dead rose not, are indicated in the form 
of a question.—And why also do we stand 
in jeopardy every hour?—[With baptizing 
for the dead, he had nothing todo. But he, no 
less than those before mentioned, were pursuing 
a most absurd and irrational course, if they could 
count upon no compensation for the pains of 
their self-denial in a resurrection state. Here, 
it will be observed, all the way through, that, in 
the Apostle’s mind, future existence, apart from 
the resurrection, was as nothing. The doctrine 
of the immortality of the soul seems with him to 
have been identified with that of the restoration 
of the body. What he looked for was the glorifi- 
cation of his entire constitution, body, soul, and 
spirit; and to be bereft of any part, was with 
him a marring of the whole. He ‘would not be 
unclothed, but clothed upon,”’ with a nobler ves- 
ture than that he had here. His reasoning is of 
force only on this supposition]. Dropping his 
associates he now passes over to himself individ- 

Mally.—Daily do I die.—As he before speaks 
of himself and his associates beiuzg in hourly 


δ90 





jeopardy, so here he expresses the continuance 
of his own still worse condition, by exhibiting it 
asa daily death. And this dying may be ex- 
plained, either of the extreme danger he was 
ever in, being so much greater than that just 
spoken of, g.d., ‘I daily hover on the brink of 
death’ (comp. Rom. viii. 86; 2 Cor. iv. 10; i. 
10); or, it may be construed subjectively of his 
sense of dying (Osiander, according to Luther). 
Meyer explains it: “1 go about dying; I am 
moribund,’—a vividly symbolic designation of 
the fatal dangers by which Paul saw himself to 
be daily threatened.” This explanation also 
slides over into the subjective, which is sup- 
ported by the parallels adduced by Wetstein on 
this passage. ‘This suits well with the adjuration 
following—(I protest) by your rejoicing,— 
This is the only place in the New Testament 
where v# occurs; but we meet with it frequently 
in the LXX. It belongs to the Attic style, [and 
occurs in the celebrated oath of Demosthenes, 
where he swore by the shades of those who had 
met death in the field of Marathon, exhorting 
the Athenians to defend the Republic (Calvin)]. 
It is here used for strengthening the previous 
assertion [—‘‘an oath by which he wished to 
arouse the Corinthians to be more attentive in 
listening to him as to the matter in hand, g. d. 
‘brethren, [ am not some philosopher, prattling 
in the shade. As I expose myself every day to 
death, itis necessary that I should think in good 
earnest of the heavenly life. Believe, therefore, 
aman who is thoroughly experienced.’”” Catvin. 
And, in explaining the nature of the oath, Theo- 
phylact acutely observes, that, in swearing by 
his boast over them, “‘he meant to remind them 
that he expects them to maintain with constancy 
this their faith; g. d. ‘If I boast on account of 
your improvement, so shall I be ashamed, if, at 
last, ye so wretchedly act as to disbelieve the 
resurrection,’’’ (cited by Bloomfield) ].—That by 
which he protests, is the boasting which he had 
over the Corinthians; for we are here to take 
ὑμέτεραν, your, as standing in place of the geni- 
tive of the object, ὑμῶν, as in Rom. xi. 31; τὸ 
καύχημα ἡμῶν τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, 2 Cor. ix. 8. In 
reference to this boasting, comp. 2 Cor. iii. 1; 
x. 15. There is something very touching in this 
declaration, which is still further enhanced by 
the affectionate address.—brethren,—[On this 
see Critical Notes]. This boasting over the 
Corinthians, over their subjection to the faith, 
and his great success in establishing a church so 
renowned and gifted, he says, he holds—in 
Christ Jesus our Lord.—i. 6., in virtue of his 
fellowship with Christ, as a servant, who had 
accomplished great things by His power. The 
meaning then is, ‘as truly as I can boast of you, 
in Jesus Christ our Lord, do I daily tremble 
amid the dangersof death.’ Meyer Ed. 8, laying 
particular emphasis on ‘ you,” explains it some- 
what differently: ‘*So truly as ye, yourselves, 
are the object of my boasting.” ‘The Corin- 
thians, whose conversion was an apostolic tri- 
umph for Him, could themselves bear witness 
what fatal dangers beset him in his apostolic 
work” (?). From the general he now passes 
over into the special.—If after the manner of 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
terpenes ing aig eg 


ability, with the exercise of the utmost strength’ 
(Kiickert); since neither the contrast points to 
this, nor is the phrase ordinarily used in this 
sense. Nor yet does it mean ‘to speak after the 
manner of men,’ for there is no λέγω or λαλῶ 
connected with it; [nor yet, ‘as far as man was 
concerned.’ (Wordsworth)]. But it means, ‘ac- 
cording to the ways of common men,’ ‘according 
to those interests and views by which men are 
governed,’—aiming, for example, at reward, or 
glory, and the like; or, as Neander: “with a 
merely human hope, and without any expecta- 
tion of eternal life.”—I fought with beasts at 
Ephesus,—Respecting the allusion here, ex- 
positors are divided. Some take the words lit- 
erally, and understand by them that the apostle, 
when at Ephesus, had been actually condemned 
to fight with beasts in the amphitheatre, from 
which contest he had been marvelously rescued; 
others, construe metaphorically, understanding 
the apostle to speak of a conflict with violent and 
dangerous men, or with strong and embittered 
foes. Expressions implying the latter are found 
in Appian (οἵοις ϑηρίοιΣ μαχόμοϑα), and in Igna- 
tius Ad. Kom. v. (eomp. 2 Tim. iv. 17; Tit. i. 
12; Matt. vii. 6). The former interpretation is 
rendered improbable, not only because of the 
rights of Roman citizenship, which Paul enjoyed, 
which precluded such punishment, and to which 
he would have appealed, in case he had been 
condemned to it; but also from the fact that no 
mention of any such extraordinary occurrence is 
made in the Acts, nor in 2 Cor. xi. 28 ff.—But in 
adopting the metaphorical explanation, we are 
not to suppose the allusion here to be to the up- 
roar excited by Demetrius (Acts xix.), which did 
not occur until after this epistle was written, and 
in which Paul incurred no personal danger; nor 
yet, perhaps, to any one particular circumstance, 
but rather to his whole conflict with his Jewish 
opponents. (Comp. Acts xx. 19.) [The argu- 
ments for its being taken literally are thus set 
forth by Stanley, who, however, regards the 
metaphorical interpretation as the more likely.” 
1. The metaphor would be more violent here 
than in Ignatius, where it is evidently drawn 
from the actual prospect of the wild beasts in 
the amphitheatre; 2. The Asiarchs, who are 
mentioned xix. 31 of Acts, as restraining the tu- . 
mult of Demetrius, appear in Polycarp’s Martyr- 
dom to have had the charge of the wild beasts ; 
8. Although there are no remains of an amphi- 
theatre at Ephesus, yet traces of a stadium are 
to be seen; and in the case of Polycarp, wild 
beasts were used in the stadium at Smyrna; 4. 
the young men at Ephesus were famous for their 
bull-fights. Artimedor. i. 9 (Wetstein); 5. that 
ἐν Σφέσῳ seems a forced expression, if the allu- 
sion is merely to opponents generally. Whatever 
be the danger, it must be the same of which he 
speaks in Rom. xvi. 4; 2Cor. i. 8; Acts xx. 19.’’] 
what advantageth it me,—a strong way of 
putting the negative. His conflict was an aim- 
less, useless hazarding of life.—if the dead 
rise not ?—This clause is not to be connected 
with what precedes [as in the E. V.], as though 
designed to explain the words “after the manner 
of men;” or as forming a second condition to 


men—Here is where the emphasisin this clause | the question just put—although according to the 


lies. 


The meaning is not, ‘if, according to man’s | sense, it belongs with it; but, because of the 





CHAP. XV. 29- 84. 


881 


ON EEE Se ee eee 


concinnity of the clauses, it must be connected 
with what follows, where it gives a frivolous turn 
to the question, ‘‘What advantageth it me?” in 
the spirit of a light-hearted unbelief, in order to 
exhibit in its preper light, how unsuitable, even 
in a moral aspect, that supposition was, and how 
it involved the most absurd consequences. — let 
us eat and drink; for to-morrow we die.— 
These words are taken literally from Isa. xxii. 
13, where they occur as the utterance of a God- 
forgetting light-mindedness. The meaning is 
‘He who denies the resurrection of the dead, by 
thus robbing himself of all the consolations of 
faith and hope, comes by natural consequence 
to surrender himself to the constant enjoyment 
of the present life, since death was soon coming 
to put an end to allenjoyment. Weare not, 
however, to infer from this that the Corinthian 
opponents of the resurrection had actually 
preached such doctrine. All Paul intends is to 
let them see the consequences of their own posi- 
tion; and he here intimates that this denial was 
not altogether unconnected with the cultivation 
of too great intimacy with the profligate society 
around them. Similar expressions of Epicurean 
frivolity occur in Isa. lvi. 12; Wisdom ii. 1ff, 
and in the classics;* (Comp. Wetstein i. h. 1.) 
The words ‘‘rise not,’ and ‘‘ die,’’ do not neces- 
sarily involve annihilation. Even existence in 
Hades, without the hope of resurrection, was a 
joyless state. 

That the frivolous tendency indicated in the 
foregoing words actually existed among the Co- 
rinthian deniers of the resurrection is clear 
from the warning which follows; for in the “evil 
communications” he speaks of, he no doubt has 
these persons in mind, and by reference to a 
verse of the comedian Menander, expressive of 
a general truth which perhaps had also taken 
the form of a proverb among them, he admo- 
nishes his readers that they had reason to guard 
against the influences of such people.—Be not 
deceived :—The caution implies a strong temp- 
tation [inherent in human nature and its social 
tendencies, by which many are insensibly be- 
guiled into the formation of views and habits 
from which they would at first have strongly re- 
coiled], Evil communications corrupt 
good manners.—’0 “i Aia means association, in- 
tercourse, and conversation which arises from 
it; the plural form is found in the New Testa- 
ment only here. Ἢ ϑος, a mode of action, cha- 
racter, disposition, moral quality. Χρηστός else- 
where in the New Testament means kind, mild, 
good, suitable, etc., here being contrasted with 
κακαί it implies moral goodness (Plato: χρηστότης--- 





*[The following instances may be quoted as a specimen: 
“Ὁ beate Sesti! 
Vitae summa brevis nos vetat inchoare longam, 
Iam te premet nox, fabulaeque Manes 
Et domus exilis Plutonia: 
O happy Sestius! the brief span of human life forbids us to 
indulge a distant hope. Soon will night descend upon thee, 
and the fabulous Manes, and the shadowy mansion of Pluto.” 
Hor. Carm. i. 4, 13-17. 
“Sapias, vina liques, et spatio brevi 
Speram longam reseces. Durn loquimur, fugerit invida 
Aetas. Carpe diem, quam minimun credula postero. 
Be wise; rack off your wines; and abridge your distant 
hopes in adaptation to the brevity of life. While we speak, 
envious age has been flying. Seize the present day, depend- 
ing as little as possible on any future one.’?—Hor. Carm. i. 
11, 6-8.] 
e 








ἤϑους σπονδαιότης). Lachmann gives the read- 
ing χρήσϑ᾽. So it reads in the original of Me- 
nander ; but it is a question whether the apostle 
observed the metre. The authorities are not 
sufficient to decide. [‘‘The quotation shows the 
apostle’s acquaintance with heathen literature, 
and to a certain extent his sanction of it, as in 
his quotation from Aratus in Acts xvii. 28, and 
Epimedes in Tit. i. 12. Menander was famous. 
for the elegance with which he threw into the- 
form of single verses or short sentences, the. 
maxims of that practical wisdom in the affairs, 
of common life which forms so important a fea-. 
ture in the new comedy. In the sentence cited, . 
each word is emphatic; character (737) may be- 
undermined by talk (ὁμιλίαι) : honesty (ypyora), 
may be undermined by roguery (κακαί). STan-. 
LEY].—To those already contaminated by the: 
treacherous influences of such frivolous men he: 
now calls out abruptly—éxvyAwpare δικαίως. 
lit:—sober out rightly,—[‘‘ An exclamation, 
full of apostolic majesty.” BrncGreL.] By this. 
he gives them to understand that the suscepti- 
bility to such trifling communications lies in a. 
state of spiritual drunkenness, out of which they 
ought at once to rouse themselves. The same: 
expression is used of drunkards in Joel i. 5.. 
[The aorist form adds force to the imperative, 
implying that the act must be done instantly. 7; 
Δικαίως means as tt befits them, in the right way. 
By this he indicates, not so much the degree as. 
the kind of sobriety he would have them culti- 
vate—in contrast perhaps with the false sobriety, 
of their new light which migbt appear to them, 
as an emerging from the narrowness of their: 
traditional notions into a state of luminous 
thought and feeling. Others explain the word 
of the direction which they were to take; or they 
refer it to the object to be pursued. So Calvin: 
‘Turn your mind to good and holy things.’ But 
this transcends the simple meaning of the term. 
[Alford says, however, ““ The last meaning is 
well defended by Dr. Peil. from Thue. i. 21: 
ἀπίστως ἐπὶ TO μυϑῶδες éxvevixyxdta,—where the- 
adverb ἀπίστως must be rendered ‘so as to, 
become incredible,’ and seems to be the best’’]. 
and sin not ;—The imperative is here in the. 
present, and so implies the continued and per- 
petual abstaining from all sin. The words con- 
vey an exhortation, and not in inference, [as 
Bengel, who says that the imperative after an. 
imperative has the force of a future (John vii. 
37. Note)], ‘so ye will not sin.’ Nor are we to; 
understand by ‘sin,’ a@ mere error of the under- 
standing (Bengel), (this may accord with the: 
classical use of the word ἀμαρτάνειν, but not with. 
its Biblical and Pauline use); but a turning aside: 
from the ways of righteousness, moral error in con-. 
sequence of unbelief.and a denial of the resur- 
rection. ‘‘In the apostle’s: view, a frivolous 
mind appeared as something sinful.”” NEANDER. 
—The reason for this admonition he further as- 
signs by referring that treacherous unbelief’ 
which appeared to: them as the result of pro- 
founder knowledge, toa lack of that true know- 
edge which is the ground of all other knowledge. 
—for some have ignorance of God.—As his. 
previous admonition was directed to those in the 
church who were in danger of being ensnared 
by the talk of the frivolous deniers of the resur- 


892 





rection, so does this statement here point to the 
false teachers themselves, setting them in such 
light as to open the eyes of the others in regard 
to their true character and to bring them to see 
the vanity of this unbelief. Accordingly, by the 


word ‘‘some,”’ we are not to understand another’ 


portion of the church, but those mentioned in 
ver. 12, and of these, not simply a portion, but 
the whole. ‘The ignorance of God” which they 
manifested and which was nothing less than a 
practical alienation from God, is exhibited as an 
abiding trait by the use of the word ‘‘have,”’ 7. e. 
they are permanently affected with it. Theyare 
thus represented as having settled down upon 
the platform of heathenism. The thought is es- 
sentially the same as in Matt. xxii. 29. ‘Ye do 
err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power 
of God.” Not knowing God as the Living and 
Omnipotent One, is the reason why people assert 
the impossibility of the resurrection.—That such 
persons should be found in the church of God was 
a disgrace to the whole church. This he gives 
them to understand in the words annexed.—To 
your shame do I speak. —[‘‘boldly —he 
speaks more severely than at the beginning on 
another subject.” iv. 14. Benarn. There is no 
need of adding ‘‘ this,” as the Εἰ. V., since the 
language here refers to what is said in the whole 


‘passage]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


The power of the believer's faith and hope. Faith 
‘in a living Saviour, who was dead and rose again, 
and now lives eternally to take His own into the 
fellowship of His eternal and perfect life,—and 
‘also the root of this faith, even. the knowledge of 
the living God, who is exalted above all changes 
cof life and death, and lifts His kindred creature 
man out from his transient, mortal state, into 
His own unchanging felicity, through the redemp- 
‘tion of His incarnate Son,—awakens in the be- 
liever a lofty, cheerful courage, which shrinks 
‘from no danger, which readily exposes itself to 
‘the most painful and appalling conflicts, and 
which is willing to lead a dying life, yea even to 
‘lay down body and soul when the Master’s cause 
requires it. For whatis temporal life, with all its 
joys and pleasures, with alkits needs and strug- 
gles, in comparison with that eternal life, from 
‘whence all that is transient has vanished, and 
where all that is now upon us and in us worthy 
of preservation, is insured and perpetuated after 
having been purified, developed and matured for 
unspeakable blessedness and glory ? 

Far different is it, where that faith and know- 
‘ledge are wanting, and where a person is con- 
strained to give up the hope of such blessedness. 
In such a case all sacrifices of whatever is tran- 
sient, all hazards and self-denials and conflicts, 
must appear useless and absurd. The sole rea- 
sonable course is to seize the passing moment, 
and enjoy to the full whatever this life may af- 
ford, and to use all means for obtaining, pre- 
serving and increasing such enjoyment.—-Experi- 
ence teaches, also, that that system of speculation 
which abandons the true Gospel foundation—-a 
pantheistic gnosis, for example—however spiri- 
‘tual it may appear at the first, and even though 
asserting an ethica) character, sinks at last gra- 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


7 


dually, if not suddenly, into downright material- 
ism and carnal license. Its earlier aspects and 
attitude, both in its theoretical and practical 
bearings, must be ascribed to a previous know- 
ledge, and regarded as the lingering result of 
the truth which has been essentially abandoned. 
We may also say, that the higher moral attitude 
maintained by any system which lacks the true 
faith and its attendant hope, is owing to a hid- 
den faith and hope, still slumbering in the depths 
of the spirit, which, however, in consequence of 
the prevailing views can attain to no settled 
form in the thoughtful mind. But those who 
are of a frivolous nature, and who shamelessly 
proclaim their folly in word and deed, form a 
dangerous class for the unsteadfast to associate 
with. Against these it is needful to guard, 
since by them the fruit of a good education is — 
often destroyed. And these influences are the 
more dangerous, in proportion as they carry the 
appearance of a high tone of spirituality, or fall 
in with the current of the time. In such-a case 
we may well call to mind the language of the 
apostle where he speaks of Satan as ‘‘ the prince 
of the power of the air, the spirit that now 
worketh in the children of disobedience.” 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


LutHer:—Ver. 34. ‘‘He who would recog- 
nize God, must learn to know Him through His 
Word. This they [the worldly-wise] don’t do; 
but they go directly at the articles of faith with 
their own understandings, and with their own 
thoughts, and so presume to judge of God, and 
of all things concerning Him. Hence they never 
hit Him.” 

Starxe:—Ver. 80. No pains, or labors, or 
watchings, or strivings, to serve God are lost. 
As surely as God is a righteous judge will there 
come a resurrection of the dead.—Ver. 31. What 
is the daily spiritual dying of the faithful, and 
their constant familiarity with sufferings and 
persecutions other than a confirmation of the re- 
surrection to a life eternal? Ver. 82. Hostile, 
dangerous men are worse than wild beasts. If 
thou hast to deal with such, sigh to God; be 
watchful, circumspect, and patient.—Unhappy 
man, who believest not in the resurrection of the 
dead! For such a one grows secure, falls from 
one sin to another, and slides on towards dam- 
nation. 

Hep. :—Ver. 38. If we flee the plague and con- 
tagion, why not also evil companionship? Is 
temporal life more than the soul? Ordinarily, 
men guard against disease more than against 
sin. (2Tim. 11. 17).—There are words and 
speeches which, under cover of worldly respect 
and courtesy, conceal a dangerous poison to 
faith and life. Whoso is wise let him take heed. 
(Jas. ili. 8).—Ver. 34. All who have the means 
for knowing God, and still are blind, are in- 
volved in disgrace. Oh! that they may not 
thereby be brought to shame and everlasting 
contempt! (Dan. xii. 2). 

BERLENBURGER BipeL:—Ver. 31. Dyingmeans 
to hate one’s own life in true self-denial, and to 
give it over to death and destruction, with every- 
thing which is in and upon man from the fall.— 
The fact itself is well substaxtiated, but what a 


CHAP. XY. 29-84. 





great, deep, rich mystery of God is in it, that 
faith alone can see. This is already a kind of 
secret dying, when we dare not even reckon upon 
our own righteousness before God, but condemn 
it as a filthy rag. (Phil. iii. 8-10). Accordingly, 
it is a sort of dying when we abandon ourselves 
in’contradiction to, and beyond our own reason, 
solely to the unseen, and rest upon the simple 
promise of God, and that, too, after we have been 
accustomed to stand upon our own gifts and 
works. And these secret crucifixions of nature, 
in its pride and self-willedness, and seeming 
sanctity, must take place daily, yea, momenta- 
rily, in the very best of Christians if they would 
not backslide. Yea, in all believers there is no 
surer safeguard against all kinds of pride which 
may arise easily in connection with much grace, 
than this daily dying to self, and one’s own 
life. But traces of this are manifest only in the 
children of light. Crude and unbroken spirits 
know as little of this as do hypocrites, who put 
their Christianity in much outward show. No 
one can occupy himself in this save he who is 
trained in conflict against the mysteries of ini- 
quity hidden in himself.—He who does not of his 
own accord daily die unto the old man and his 
evil lusts, constrains God to lay hold on him with 
power and humble him; but he who willingly 
resolves to follow Christ, and confesses him ho- 
nestly before men, will not long be exercised with 
tribulations.—In sum: Every thing with which 
man has to do, gives a believer cause and oppor- 
tunity for mortifying his own life, and hastening 
to a complete separation from the false things of 
this world.—Ver. 32. The Christian’s life-walk, 
which consists in the constant renouncing of the 
works of darkness, in the mortification of the 
flesh and sin, in turning away from the godless 
ways of this world, and in the denial of all lusts, 
desires, and vanities, is an earnest preparation 
for the resurrection. Hence Christians prefer 
the Cross of Christ, and all the shame, and per- 
secution, and contempt which may be heaped 
upon them daily by the children of unbelief, to 
all the treasures, and honors, and enjoyments, 
and friendships of this present life. And this 
they could not certainly do, if they believed in no 
resurrection. The lastrefuge and comfort of the 
world is, to take what one can get.—But is there 
so much depending upon the resurrection? Could 
not the simple happiness of the soul after death 
recompense every thing? No. However much 
of enjoyment it may have, the soul must still al- 
ways miss something, and through its natural 
inward longing, must ceaselessly urge God to 
bestow upon it again a suitable body.—Ver. 33. 


There are many spirits who transform themselves 


into angels of light, and go about in sheep’s clo- 
thing, by whom many persons are befooled into 
dancing around some Aaron’s calf that has been 
setup. But if any one imagines that he is fully 
competent to take care of himself, such a person 
is altogether too confident, and will be certain 
not to escape unharmed.—Man has in himself 
enough which should humble him. Butif he in- 
sists on spreading his feathers, alas! it is all over 
with him. The excuse: ‘I was young then, 
does not exonerate a person.—Ver. 34. Ah! 
what charm is there not for throwing men into 
adeep sleep? Hence the necessity of holding 








333 
fast, betimes, to what is fundamental. Wake at 
once out of such a fool’s sleep! Oh, how will- 


ingly does man linger in the haven of carnal se- 
curity and indifference! From such places of 
ease does He who walks in the midst of His 
Church summon all to come forth to earnest la- 
bor, and to advancement in their holy calling.— 
People deem it a disgrace if they are told, ‘ they 
know not God,’ but it should only shame them 
into improvement.—There are two sorts of di- 
vine knowledge; the one is external, literal, 
dead, and unfruitful; the other is internal, spiri- 
tual, living, and fruitful. The former is grounded 
simply in natural knowledge, in learning, or 
speaking of God, as when one can use the lan- 
guage of Scripture, or repeat it again to others 
without experiencing its power. But if that 
which has been externally apprehended is sealed 
upon the conscience through the Holy Spirit, and 
if all the testimonies of God awaken in one a new 
life, so that he is actually changed and improved 
thereby, then does God appear before the eyes of 
the heart, and the man becomes inwardly con- 
vinced how righteous, true, good, and holy He 
is; then are the eyes of the understanding 
widely opened to see what and how much God 
does for him, and what he is bound to do in re- 
turn—what God has promised, and what we have 
to expect of Him. 

Rrecer :—Ver. 30ff. In all the joy won by 
communion with Christ, there is daily opportu- 
nity to bear about in the body the dying of the 
Lord Jesus. Now if, with all this, I could not 
set my hope upon the living God who raises the 
dead ; if I could not regard all the steps I take 
in the communion of His sufferings and in the 
likeness of His death as well-measured approaches 
to the resurrection of the dead; if all this is 
only for the maintenance of my own opinion, 
and only with reference to this short life, what 
availeth it for me? To suppose that Divine 
blessedness and also the sufferings endured in 
behalf of righteousness should avail nothing, is 
athought which destroys all religion and sun- 
ders the connection between God and man. If 
we hold not to the word of promise, and to the 
hope afforded therein, we have no certainty 
for eternity, and consequently no assurance that 
we shall not slide into the old forms of speech, 
wherein everything runs to the enjoyment of this 
life, but where death, and its sting are frivol- 
ously denied, and all the weighty things which 
follow thereupon, together with all Christian 
hope, are thrust out of sight, and all exhorta- 
tion to diligence in salvation will be heard no 
more.—That which deserves to be called good 
morals, and sound knowledge, and correct taste, 
should aim at what is unseen and eternal, and be 
sustained and be kept in exercise by a spirit of 
faith and self-denial. But how full the world is 
of such idle talk which turns us away from this, 
and makes us uncertain and credulous, as if over 
come by some magic potion. Error, slumber and, 
indifference towards God and his counsel, andthe 
observance of His ways, are the cause of much sin. 

Hevupner: — Ver. 808. Without faith in a 
future life, many acts of the Christian life, 
many sacrifices and hazards, would be foolish 
and purposeless. This faith and steadfast virtue 
are inseparable. Without this faith that virtue 


884 


which looks not to the unseen, would be a vain 
over-straining and fanaticism; and a prudent 
enjoyment of life would be the highest wisdom. 
Ver. 34. Sobriety, is the clear consciousness of 
God and His will. A correct self-knowledge 
leads to a correct faith. Unbelief comes from 
thorough self-ignorance, dissipation and unre- 
strained frivolity. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 33. If traitors to God 
find ready helpers in our own lusts, then is it 
a Christian duty to avoid all needless intercourse 
with them, and not allow ourselves to purchase 
their vain words for the sake of setting forth 
our own hateful inclinations ina seemly garb 
(Eph. v. 6, 7.).—Ver. 34. The poison of all 
erroneous doctrine is intoxicating; and in imbibing 
it, we allow ourselves to be intoxicated. Well 
for us, if we properly awake when the voice of 
truth arouses us, in order that we may spue out 


the poison of sin, ere we die therein !—* God is. 


not the God of the dead but of the living” 
(Matt. xxii. 82). Hence, he who denies the 
resurrection of the dead knows not the true God. 

[Rosrmrtrson:—Ver. 32. ‘‘How many of the 
myriads of the human race would do right for 
the sake of right, if they were only to live fifty 
years and then die for ever more? Go to the 
sensualist, and tell him that a nobler life is better 
than a base one, even for that time, and he will 
answer: ‘I like pleasure better than virtue ; 
you can do as you please; for me,I will enjoy 
my time. It is a matter of taste. By taking 
away my hope of a resurrection you have 
dwarfed good and evil, and shortened their con- 
sequences, If I am only to live sixty or seventy 
years, there is no eternal right or wrong. By 
destroying the thought of immortality, I have 
lost the sense of the infinitude of evil, and the 
eternal nature of good.’ Besides, with our hopes of 
immortality gone, the value of humanity ceases 
and people become not worth living for. We 
have not got a motive strong enough to keep us 
from sin. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. - 


theory of the life to come be a dream, yet that 
here the pleasure of doing right is sublimer 
than that of self-indulgence, and he will answer: 
‘Yes, but my appetites are strong; the struggle 
will be painful, and at last, only a few years 
will be left. The victory is uncertain, the pres- 
ent enjoyment is sure, why should I refrain? 
Do you think you can arrest that with some 
fine sentiment about nobler and baser being. 
No, the instincts of the animal will be more than 
a match for all the transcendental reasonings of 
the philosopher ” (abbreviated). 

Hopge :—Ver. 83. ‘It is only when men as- 
sociate with the wicked with the desire and pur- 
pose of doing them good, that they can rely on 
the protection of God to preserve them from 
contamination.’’ ] 

[Sermons.—J. Owen: — Ver. 31. The Chris- 
tian’s work of dying daily. This to be done 
cheerfully, comfortably, and triumphantly in the 
Lord. To this three things requisite: 1. The 
constant exercise of faith as to the resignation 
of a departing soul unto the hand and sovereign 
will-of God. 2. A readiness and willingness to 
part with this body on the grounds: a, That 
to depart is to be with Christ ; ὁ, That the body is 
dead because of sin. 8. Constant watchful- 
ness against being surprised by death. R. Hatz: 
—Ver. 33. Nature and danger of evil communica- 
tions. 1. What these communications are; a, 
such as tend to sensualize the mind; ὁ, such as 
utterly lack areligious spirit; c, such as abound 
in skeptical objections to Christianity ; d, such 
as are full of hatred to Christianity; e, such as 
are loose with respects to fundamental moral 
principles. 2. The way in which they corrupt 
through the natural suceptibilities of the human 
mind. 8. The need of the warning, ‘‘be not 
deceived”: a, by the adduction of false pre- 


cedents; 5, by your past experience; 6, by any 


complacent reference to your age and attain- 
ments in piety; d, by any supposed strength of 


Tell the sensualist that, though the | resolution]. 


C. Refutation of the denial of the resurrection of the dead, in reference to its mode; and the constitution of 
the resurrection body. 


Cuarter XV. 35-50. 


body do they come? 
ened, except it die: 


But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what [kind of, ποίῶ] 
Thou [om. Thou] fool, that which thou sowest is not quick- 
And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body thai 


shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain [ of some 


of the other grains, τίνος τῶν λοιπῶν]: But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased 
him [he willed, ἡϑέλησεν, and to every seed hisown body. ΑἸ] flesh 7s not the same 


flesh: but there is one kind of flesh [om. kind of flesh]? of men, another flesh of 
beasts, another of fishes’ [another flesh of birds], and another of birds [fishes]®. 


CHAP. XV. 35-50. 335 








There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is 
one, and the glory of the terrestrial 7s another. There is one glory of the sun, and 
another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differeth from 
another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, 
itis raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory: it is sown in 
weakness, it is raised in power: It is sown a natural [an animal, ψυχικόν] body, it is raised 
a spiritual body. There is*a natural body, and there is [if there is an animal body, there 
is also] aspiritual body. And soit is written, The first man? Adam was made [became, 
ἐγένετο εἰς] alivingsoul; the last Adam was made [om. was made] a quickening spirit. 
Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural [animal]; and after- 
ward that which is spiritual. The first man ἐβ [was] of the earth, earthy: the second 
man 7s the Lord*[om. the Lord]* from heaven. Ass [was] the earthy, such are they 
also that are earthy: and as 7s the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And 
as we have borne [ wore, égopésayev] the image of the earthy, we shall also bear [we will 
wear, φορέσομεν, or, let us wear, φορέσωμεν] the image of the heavenly. Now this I 
say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth 
corruption inherit® corruption. 


40 
41 
42 
43 


44 
45 


46 
41 
48 
49 


δ0 


1 Ver. 36.—The Rec. has ἄφρον instead of ἄφρων. Τί is however feebly attested, and is a correction. [The more infre- 
quent nominative was more likely to be altered, as in several instances it has been, into the vocative. It is however 
found in A. B.D. E. F. G, Sinait. and some cursives, while the vocative is given only in K. L., many cursives, Orig., 
Epiph., and some others.—C. P. W.]. 

2 Ver. 39.—The σάρξ which some [ Rec. et al.] have put before ἀνθρώπων is thrown out [by Matth., Lachmann, Tischen- 
dorf, Alford, and Bloomfield], on the authority of the best MSS. [A. B.D. E. F. G.K. L. Sinait., 60 cursives, Syr. (later) 
Copt., Aeth., Greek and Latin Fathers, and indeed is sustained by noimportant M8.]. The same word before πτηνῶν is bet- 
ter sustained [B. D. E. F. G. Sinait., several copies of the Vulg., Copt., Theophyl., Tert., Ambrst.], but it isrejected by Meyer 
as a mechanical addition. 

3 Ver. 39.—The position of ἄλλη δὲ ἰχθυῶν before ἄλλη δὲ o. πτηνῶν is not so well attested as the reverse order. [It has 
for it only Εἰ. G. Κα. L., the larger number of cursiyes. the later Syr., Theodt., Oecum., but against it A. B. Ὁ. E. Sinait., 
6 cursives, 3 Latin MSS., the Vulg., Copt., Syr., (Pesch.), Chrys., Dam., Theophyl., Orig., tert. The order of the words in 
this verse appears much deranged in many MSS., though the general sense is not thereby affected.—C. P. W.] 

# Ver. 44.—The Rec. has ἔστιν σῶμα ψυχικόν, καὶ ἔστι σῶμα πνευματικόν, but a better attested reading is ἐι ἔστιν σῶμ. 
ψυχ., ἔστιν καὶ πνευματικόν. [The uncials A. B. C. Ὁ. F.G. Sinait., 9 cursives, the Ital., Vulg., Copt., Aeth., Arm., are all 
in favor of the latter reading, which is adopted by Lachmann, TYischendorf, Alford and Stanley. It was natural from 
the similarity of the preceding and the commencement of the succeeding clauses that a transcriber should omit εἰ. It 
must however be conceded that the internal evidence is against Lachmann’s reading, for as Reiche aud Bloomfield re- 
mark the sentiment thus becomes jejune and hardly like Paul’s usual style. The whole sentence is omitted in several 
cursives and Chrys., but Meyer accounts for the omission by the homceoteleuton.—C., P. W.]. 

5 Ver. 45.—According to the best MSS. ἄνθρωπος is to be retained. Its omission in some [B. K. 8 cursives, Did. 
Tren., (Lat.) Tert., (once)|, may be explained by an attempt to conform to the contrasted ὃ ἔσχ. ᾿Αδὰμ. 

6 Ver. 47.—The Rec. has ὁ κύριος after ὁ δεύτ. avOp., but according to the best MSS, it should be thrown out as a gloss. 

It was suspected by Griesbach, and erased by Lachmann, Tischendorf and Alford, following B.C. D. (ist hand) E. F. G., 
ineit., (Ist hand), 17, the Ital., Vulg., Copt., Aeth., Arm., and many Greek and Latin writers. In the Dialogue against 

the Marcionites printed among Origen’s works, and in Tertul. against the same the insertion of ὁ κύρ, is ascribed to the 

heretics. Comp. Tisch. N. T. 7th edit.—C. P. W.]. \ 

7 Ver. 49.—The evidence for φορέσωμεν instead of φορέσομεν is strong, but the word does not seem suitable in this place, 
See Exegetical Notes. [The documentary authority for thesubjunctive (adopted by Lachmann and Stanley seems abso- 
lutely decisive (A.C. D. E. F.G@. K. L. Sinait. above 20 cursives, the Ital., Vulg., Copt., Goth., Slav., Theodt., Orig., (de 
Ja Rue), Cyr., Macar., Caes., Bas., Meth., Chrys.,(in expos.), Max., Epiph., pseud-Athan., Damasc., Iren., (Latin), Tert., 
Cypr., Hilar., Jerome). The Rec. however has for it, the important testimony of B., a number of cursives, the Syr., (both), 
Arab., Aeth., Arm., Orig., (other editions) Cyr., (glaph. and nest.), Theodt., Theophyl., Oecum. These two last especially 
mention and explain both readings. (See their remarks in Tischendorf’s N.T.). The subjunctive certainly seems untena- 
ble, as an ethical exhortation at this point would appear wholly out of place, and was adopted only to avoid making the 
apostle contradict what he had said in ver. 50.—C P. W.}. 

8 Ver. 50.—Lachmann reads κληρονομήσει, but it is not satisfactorily attested [C. (Ist hand) D. (1st hand) F. G. Ital. 
Vulg., Copt., Syr.,(Pesch), and the Latin writers. Meyer thinks it was occasioned by its similarity in sound with κληρονομῆσαι. 


at Athens. As Calvin says, ‘‘nothing is more at 
variance with human reason than this article of 


RE SREP A Wy AP, Cel TE ede faith ;” and, hence, there is hardly one which 


Vers. 35-38, After having established the be- 
lief in the resurrection of the dead, on the ground 
of Christ’s resurrection—a fact well attested and 
lying at the foundation of the whole Christian 
salvation—and, besides, having exhibited the 
untenableness of the contrast on other grounds, 
he next proceeds to encounter those objections 
which related, partly, to the process itself, and, 
partly, to the result—But some one will 
say,—He here introduces his opponents speak- 
ing in the character of persons who, not satisfied 
with the argument hitherto, now, for the first 
time, come in with their own reasons for doubt- 
ing. [These persons are not to be confounded 
with sincere inquirers; rather, they belong to 
the class of mockers, such as Paul encountered 


provokes such ridicule and calls out so many 
cavils]|—_ How are the dead raised up? 
and with what body do they come ?—The 
present tenses are not to be explained as setting 
forth the future in the form of the present 
because of its certainty, [Stanley]; but as exhi- 
biting the case simply as a matter of thought. 
"Ep yovt a=‘ Come into manifestation.’ Two 
distinct objections are here introduced, yet 
standing in close connection, as is seen from the 
copula dé. [The first originates in a sense of 
the impossibility of the resurrection, and so asks 
for the ‘‘ how,” as a demonstration of the possi— 
bility of it; and the other seeks to puzzle by 
asking for the details of new organization, 
which, when given, it hopes to prove absurd. 


336 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





Alford resolves the two into one, regarding the 
second as only stating specifically what is in- 
volved more generally inthe first. But certainly 
the mode of the Apostle’s reply implies two dis- 
tinct points here]. The answers to both these 
questions now follow, so as to illustrate, first, 
the process of the resurrection by analogies 
drawn from vegetable life, and, next, the pecu- 
liarity of the resurrection body in its distinction 
from the present, partly, though analogies taken 
from the several spheres of creation, and, partly, 
from the difference between the first and the 
second Adam. He begins with an address to the 
deniers or the doubters of the resurrection, 
expressive at once of strong disapprobation and 
contempt.—F'ool!—By this epithet he charac- 
terizes as irrational those who are inclined to 
boast of a high degree of rationality, inasmuch 
as they ought to have convinced themselves at 
once respecting the matter in question by an 
analogy so obvious. [The term does not neces- 
sarily express any bitterness of feeling, for our 
blessed Lord used the like to his doubting disci- 
ples (Luke xxiv. 15). It was the senselessness 
of the objection that is here attacked; for it was 
lly to say, the body could not live again because 
it died. The case of the seed showed that disor- 
ganization was the necessary condition of organ- 
ization. If theseed remain a seed, there is an 
end of it; but if it die, it bringeth forth much 
fruit. (John xii. 24. So with the body (Hodge) ]-- 
What thou sowest—Xi, thou, belongs not 
to fool, as if it were an emphatic addition to the 
vocative; but it belongs to the relative clause, 
and it is placed first to show that the readers 
ought to understand from their own experience 
the unreasonableness of the objection (Neander). 
[It is the pointed finger aiming at the objector 
present to the author’s mind.—‘Thou.’] The 
human sowing is here contrasted with that of 
the divine in the implanting of human bodies in 
the grave (as Klopstock sings: ‘‘ The seed by God 
is sown, To ripen till the harvest-day ’’), but not 
the work of God in the development of the seed 
(ζωοποιεῖτ α ι)---ἶθ not made alive, unless 
it die :—What he means is, ‘From the fact that 
the seed sown by man is not made alive without 
having first passed through a process of death 
and corruption, thou oughtest to infer that it is 
just so with the human seed—that dying and 
corruption furnish no ground for asserting the 
impossibility of the resurrection.’ By the use of 
the verb ‘‘is made alive,” instead of ‘ springs up’ 
(ἀνατέλλει) the type is brought closer to the anti- 
type.—After this reply to the first question, he 
turns to a more extended explanatién of the 
nature of the new body, in answer to the second. 
From the process itself, he passes over to its con- 
tents and results by showing that, as in the 
process, there was a contrast in the develop- 
ment (first, death, and then life); so here there 
was a contrast between the seed corn and the 
plant which sprung from it. The former is 
brought prominently to view in the construction 
of the sentence, since it is set before us at the 
first in an absolute clause.—And what thou 
sowest,—i. ¢., ‘as to that which thou sowest.’— 
not that body which is to appear dost 
thou sow,—lIn view of the fact of which he is 
treating, the plant is here designated as a physi- 


” 


cal organism by the term ‘‘body;’ and in con- 
trast with this he calls that which is sown as, 
naked corn ;--γυμνὸν, i. e., either undevel- 
oped, or separated from its proper covering and 
from the life of the plant; the former explana- 
tiun is better suited to the context,—it may be 
—el τύχοι. Comp. on xiv. 10.—of wheat or 
some of the others :—réav λοιπῶν, 8¢., σπερ- 
μάτων. In opposition to a gross identification of the 
present body with the resurrection body which 
lies at the ground of the objection urged, he 
here asserts a distinction between the two—a 
distinction, however, which does not exclude 
the identity of the fundamental substance or 
the germ.’ [That which springs up differs in 
‘outward form from that which is sown; yet it is 
so far the same, that we can say that that 
which is sown‘is precisely what springs up. The 
analogy here, therefore, is sufficient to destroy 
the force of the objection raised.]* Miiller in- 
terprets ver. 37 of the intermediate state between 
death and the resurrection. He remarks “Just 
as the old seed corn which is sown into death 
retains a sort of corporeity in ever changing 
forms (in the germ, in the blade, in the stalk) 
all through an intermediate state, until it, as it 
were, attains to its resurrection and glorification 
in the fresh, green corn, so also: do human souls 
pass through their intermediate state, not with- 
out a certain sort of corporeity. But as the old 
appears again in a rejuvenated form, only when 
it has attained to a new and perfected kernel, so 
also, do those who sleep come to their full and 


*[But it may be asked, wherein consists the identity 
between the natural and the spiritual body? Certainly 
nut in the material particles of which the two are composed, 
nor yet in the sameness of structure. All suppositions of 
this sort, which find a picture of the resurrection in Ezekiel’s 
vision of the dry bones, are set aside by the force of the 
analogy which the apostle uses. Not even during our 
earthly state can it be said that the identity of our body in 
the several stages of existence, consists in the identity of 
the particles which compose it. These, as science teaches 
us, #re in continued flux day by day. By some mysterious 
process of life, are we gathering to ourselves new material 
and passing off the old; and as to the matter of our com- 
position we are no more the same in two successive moments 
than is the river that we call by the same name and yet 1s 
ever passing. Yet, no one thinks of questioning the 
identity of our persons, or of our bodies. Amid this con- 
stant change there is something fixed which makes us 
recognizable as the same from the cradle to the grave— 
something which gives form, and feature, and organization, 
to this ever-moving current of matter which is momentarily 
condensed into what we call our bodies. And what is this 
but the plastic principle of life which is ever shaping the 
materials which nature gives it for its own uses, and in ac- 
cordance With an inward Jaw Which moulds us after our 
kind? Here then we have the true substance of the body— 
that which stands underneath the outward phenomenon of 
acorporeal form and imparts to its sole reality. And if 
this be so, it is easy to see that when by death the materials 
of our present structure are all dissolved and scattered 
abroad, this vital, organific principle, abiding still in con- 
nection with the spirit, and in the presence of Christ, may, 
by th power which He, through His eternal Spirit, worketh 
in our spirits, at the resurrection gather toitself and assim- 
ilate new materials of a wholly different kind, suited to 
that new condition of things which shall be ushered in at 
the glorious appearing of our Redeemer. How far this 
new form may resemble the old, so as to enable us to identi- 
fy acquaintances and friends, is a matter on which Scripture 
gives us some faint hints. At our Saviour’s transfiguration 
Moses and Elias seem to have been recognized for what 








| they were; and after His resurrection, His disciples were- 


enabled to know their Lord. And there is nothing unrea- 
sonable in supposing that the resemblance between our 
present and glorified bodies will be sufficiently strong to 
enable us'to know our old associates again and so keep up 
a continuity between our earthly and heavenly state. It is 
at any rate, a pleasant thing to think such an identification 
possible]. 


CHAP. XV. 35-50. 887 


~ 





glorified state in the resurrection of the body, 
which will take place at the end of the world.” 
He next proceeds to show the divine causation 
in respect to the future body, thereby showing 
wherein all development, even the resurrection 
of the dead included, ultimately rests.—But 
God giveth it a body—‘‘The Holy Scrip- 
tures know nothing of an independent develop- 
ment of nature without God, about which modern 
philosophy has so much to say.” ΒΙΒΡΙΝα.-- 
ashe hath pleased,—The past tense here 
points back to the original determination of the 
Creator, in accordance with which He goes on 
perpetually giving to each seed or germ a body, 
after its own fixed kind, or conducts it onward 
to the development of the same. [In all the 
continued processes of nature, the Creator abides 
by the primitive constitution of things. The 
uniformity of His operations should not lead us 
therefore, to ignore His perpetual free agency, 
and to regard the universe in the light of a dead 
mechanism. Natureisalive with an ever-present, 
ever-active God].—and to each of the seeds 
π-σπερμάτων, lit., sperms, not only of fruits, but 
also of animals—a gradation to ver. 39. (Bengel). 
—its own body.—i δέον, own, i. e., suited to 
the species, peculiar to the individual, produced 
from the substance of the seed. The argument 
here is this: that inasmuch as this is the way of 
God’s working, we may expect something of the 
like sort in relation to the germ of the human 
body, and that it is absurd to dispute this. 
[And still further; inasmuch as we cannot infer 
from looking at a seed what the plant is to be, 
so it is very foolish to attempt to determine from 
our present bodies what is tobe the nature of 
our bodies hereafter. (Hodge) ]. 

Vers. 39-44, The diversities of organization 
in the several spheres of creation, and also the 
diversities in their glory, are next exhibited as 
analogous to the diversity between the present 
and the resurrection body, as that of a new and 
higher organization. He starts from the animal 
life, where man occupies the first position. With 
the unity of the genus (σάρ ξ, flesh,) there exists 
a striking difference in the species.—All flesh 
is not the same flesh ;—[De Wette explains 
‘flesh’ as the animal organism].—but one is 
of men, and another flesh of beasts,— 
κτῆνος, KTéavov, κτῆμα properly, animals owned by 
man, such as sheep and oxen; but here in dis- 
tinction from what follows, the word denotes 
quadrupeds in general.—and another of birds, 
and another of fishes.—The difference pre- 
dicated here is not as to substance, but as to 
quality (Calvin); and this is manifold and 
marked. [Τῇ then, we see such a variety in the 
organization of flesh and blood here, the infer- 
ence is that we may find a still greater variety 
of organizations existing in other spheres. God 
is not limited in His power and wisdom, so that 
He must make all bodies alike. ]—(There are) 
also bodies celestial :—It is not agreed wheth- 
er the apostle here means the bodies of angels, or 
heavenly bodies, such as the sun, moon and stars. 
The first interpretation, taking the expression to 
mean ‘bodies found in heaven,’ is maintained by 
Meyer and de Wette (comp. Matt. xxii. 80); the 
second is the more common one, followed by Osi- 
ander and Neander, [Hodge and Alford]. The 











latter has no support in the usage of antiquity, 
and is vindicated, partly on the ground that the 
heavenly bodies were regarded by Plato, Plu- 
tarch, Galen, and others, as animated beings; 
and partly on the ground that in ver. 38, the 
term ‘‘bodies” is applied to plants; and to this 
it may yet be added, that mot only the clearness 
and the beauty with which the stars shine, but 
also the interest attached to this whole treatment 
of the idea of corporeity, explains this rare use 
of the word σῶμα, body, as denoting a material 
whole bound together in unity of being. But it 
may be asked, whether the contrast between the 
stars viewed as heavenly bodies and the world of 
men, animals and plants, viewed as_ earthly 
bodies, is a suitable one? Perhaps, indeed, not 
so suitable as that between the bodies of angels 
and those of men and beasts. The latter ‘‘ would 
also touch and explain far better the distinction 
between the earthly body of death and the su- 
pramundane body of the resurrection” (Osian- 
der); and nothing unsuitable, nothing disturbing 
to the symmetry of the whole analogy, can be 
found init. Moreover, we are led to the suppo- 
sition that angels have bodies, from what our 
Lord says in Luke xx. 35, 86, of the equality be- 
tween angels and the children of the resurrection 
in the future world. So far as the unfitness of 
this analogy to meet the case of the skeptics is 
concerned, it must be remembered that the 
apostle has not so much to do with these, as with 
a congregation established in the faith, to whom 
such a view of angels would be neither strange 
nor incredible.*—This comparison between the 
two kinds of bodies is followed by an exhibition 
of their diversity in respect to glory. In the one 
case it is a heavenly radiance; Matt. xxviii. 3; 
and in the other case it is strength, beauty, 
grace, artificial culture, in their several manifes- 


‘tations (Meyer).—There is one glory of the 


sun, e/c.—Not only do the heavenly bodies differ 
from the earthly in glory, but there is great di- 
versity among the heavenly bodies themselves. 
The sun has one degree of lustre, the moon,an- 
other, and even the stars exhibit a wonderful 
variety of size and brilliancy among themselves. 
The allusion here might naturally lead us to 
think of the various degrees of glory in the res- 
urrection bodies, as compared with each other; 
but the context does not point to this, and allthe 
allegorical deductions, such as we find in Tertul- 
lian and others, must be pronounced erroneous. 
[So Calvin:—‘‘A mistake is here commonly 
fallen into in the application; it is supposed 
that Paul meant that, after the resurrection, the 
saints will have different degrees of honor and 
glory. This, indeed, is perfectly true, and is 
proved by other declarations of Scripture; but 
it has nothing to do with Paul’s object.” Paul is 





*(But with all these arguments in favor of regardiug the 
apostle as meaning angelic bodies, Kling prefers the other 
acceptation. And so Calvin, Bloomfield, Henry, Poole, 
Barnes, Hodge who, while speaking of it as doubtful, gives 
it the preference. But one naturally inclines to go with 
Meyer, De Wette, and Alford, Stanley, in supposing angelic 
bodies to be meant. All the accounts given of the angels 
imply the possession of a material vehicle, more subtil and 
glorious than that of man, capable of visibility or invisibility, 
at the option of spirit within; and Paul speaks of being 
‘clothed upon with his house, which is from heaven’ (2 
Cor. v. 2): and certainly this view suits the case in hand far 
better]. 


0 a τὰ ωὦ 


en σσ 


838 


= 





arguing here from existing diversities in the 
various organizations found throughout the uni- 
verse, to prove that there may be still other and 
greater varieties yet to appear—that neither the 
wisdom nor power of God has been exhausted in 
the production of different kinds of bodies, and 
will be made more signally manifest in providing 
for saints a vesture suited to the glory of Christ’s 
coming kingdom]. In the next verse we have 
the apodosis of the comparison.—So also (is) 
the resurrection of the dead.—The connec- 
tion is this: as we see so great a variety of forms 
above and below, there is abundant room for 
modifications of every sort in the humay body, 
and it indicates only great narrowness of mind 
to infer from the condition of the dying human 
body that it could undergo no transformation. 
(Burcer). The general proposition to which the 
comparison leads, viz., that there is a distinction 
between the constitution of the earthly body and 
that of the heavenly, is now more fully carried 
out.—(It) is sown in corruption,—The sub- 
ject of the sentence is indicated by the connec- 
tion. Instead of saying, ‘it is buried,’ as perti- 
nent to the case of the human body, he borrows 
his expression from the analogy above employed. 
[The bodies of the saints are as seed sown in the 
ground; and, hence, every graveyard or ceme- 
tery is most aptly termed, in German, ‘‘God’s 
Acre.” The dissolution that is there quietly 
going on, out of sight, is but preparing the way 
for a more glorious appearing, when the winter 
is past, and the millenial spring breaks upon us. ] 
As the antithesis we have—(it) is raised in 
incorruption:—Eyeiper az, is raised,—the ex- 
pression is not inconsistent with the figure. 
For we may take it in the middle sense, ‘it raises 
itself,’ or, ‘it rises,’ just as the plant does out 
of the seed corn. On account of what is said in 
ver. 36, Neander interprets the sowing, not of 
.burial in the grave, but of the development of 
life upon the earth; [and so Hodge: ‘it is now 
a corruplible body, constantly tending to decay, 
subject to disease and death, and destined to en- 
tire dissolution.” In this case the whole earth 
must be taken for God’s seed-field, and our pres- 
ent condition must be regarded as, in some sort, 
an underground one]. The preposition ‘ in,” 
in both clauses, expresses the condition in which 
the body is found in the two stages; in the first, 
the elements hitherto organically united are dis- 
solving and scattering; and in the second, we are 
raised above all corruption and harm, above all 
pain, and disease, and suffering, into a state im- 
perishable and fixed.—It is sown in dishon- 
ἸΟΥ,---ἰὰ τεμία, not simply denotes the unseemli- 
ness of the earthly body, and the humiliating in- 
firmities of its corruptible state, by reason of 
which Paul elsewhere calls it ‘‘our vile body” 
(Phil. iii. 21), but also, since he is speaking of 
burial, the foulness of the corpse, which is a re- 
minder of the disgrace incurred in the penalty 
inflicted by death.—it is raised in glory :—By 
this he means the revelation of the dignity of the 
children of God in the resplendent brightness of 
their resurrection bodies, pervaded and glorified 
by the divine life. It is to be fashioned like unto 
the glorious body of the Son of God.—it is sown. 
in weakness,—’Aciévera does not refer 
simply to the feebleness of the earthly body 


’ 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





when living [Bloomfield], but also to its perfect 
powerlessness as a corpse, its inability to resist 
corruption.—it is raised in power:—Aivayie 
denotes a fullness of strength, energy and elas- 
ticity, which a renewed vitality will confer on 
the resureection body, enabling it to execute all 
the purposes and yolitions of the spirit with the 
utmost ease and readiness.—All that is implied 
in these contrasts is condensed into the final one. 
It is sown a natural body, it is raised a 
spiritual body.—Respecting the term ‘‘natu- 
ral,” [or, more properly, ‘animal,’ ‘psychical,’ 
comp. on chap. ii. 14. The expression, ‘‘natura 
body” (σῶμα ψυχικόν), denotes, in general, 
an organization that corresponds to the soul 
(ψύχη); and “spiritual body” (σῶμα πνευμα- 
τικό ν) one that corresponds to the spirit (πνεῦμα). 
The former is one which carries the impress of 
the soul; the other, the impress of the spirit. 
The soul is that by means of which our spiritual 
part is linked to a physical life—a life of impulse 
and sensation, dependent for its nourishment 
upon a world of sense. The corporeity corres- 
ponding to this and determined by it, is precisely 
on this account made dependent upon this out- 
ward world, and is affected by it; and by reason 
of it, it is exposed to all that which has just been 
expressed by the words ‘‘ corruption,” ‘‘dishon- 
or,” and ‘*‘ weakness,” of which death is the ca- 
tastrophe. The nature of the spirit is, on the 
contrary, a free, supermundane life of light and 
love in God; and the spiritual body is an organ- 
ization suited to its character, being lifted above 
all dependence on the outward world, and the 
consequences following from it, and displays it- 
self in incorruption, glory and power. The an- 
tithesis to the animal or natural body forbids 
our explaining the epithet ‘‘spiritual” here, as 
though it meant ethereal, or refined, [‘* much less 
made of spirit, which would be a contradiction.” 
Hopvae].—According to the ordinary reading, 
the following sentence would be simply a short 
and emphatic confirmation of what has already 
been said. But the better authenticated text, 
which we are by no means justified in setting 
aside as an easier reading, or as a correction, 
presents us here with two clauses—the second 
conditioned upon the first, which is supposed to 
be conceded.—If there is an animal body,—. 
which the soul has as its corresponding organism 
—-a thing perfectly obvious—there is a spirit- 
ual body.—i. ¢., the same must hold good also 
of the spirit; this likewise must have its corres- 
ponding organ as its means of expression, and as 
the instrument of*its operations, [suited to the © 
new order of things introduced by the coming of 
Christ]. The emphasis here lies upon the word 
‘sis.” [If the one exists, so does the other]. 
Vers. 45-49. According to Ewald, the sense 
and connection of this passage may be given 
thus: ‘This order of succession in the whole 
course of the world’s history, it is impossible 
should be otherwise. The finer forms always 
follow the grosser; those more spiritual sueceed 
the more sensuous. Christ could appear only 
after Adam; and the purely heavenly Christ, 
as an external manifestation, is yet to be looked 
for. In like manner, the entire glorified humani- 
ty can only follow upon the present..—And 850 
it is written, The first man Adam was 


CHAP. XV. 35-50. 





made a living soul,—tThe citation is from 
Gen. ii. 7, with the addition of the qualifying 
words “first” and “Adam;” [ἐγέντο εἰς 
ψύχην ζῶσαν, from the LXX, being a literal 


rendering of the ‘ Hebrew πὰ Ν᾽ vingd, lites 


T; eS 
for, or, unto a living soul; and to this the follow- 
ing expression isaccommodated: εἰς πνεῦμα 
Cwororovv—The expression living soul, as 
used in Genesis, is often taken to indicate an 
order of being superior to the brute, and is the 
text of many an argument to prove the immor- 
tality of the soul. The incorrectness of this 
assumption will be readily seen by referring to 
Gen. i. 20, 21, 24 and elsewhere, in which pas- 
sages the words translated ‘living soul” are 
applied also to the entire lower creation. They 
are used indifferently of man and beast to ex- 
press animal life in general; and it is in this 
light that the apostle uses them as the very 
course of his argument shows. Adam is spoken 
of as a living soul, not to prove his immortality, 
but rather his mortality. It is by means of the 
soul that he and all descended from Him, are 
linked to this changing and corruptible world, 
and so become the heirs of corruption. The 
only superiority ascribed to man in the history 
of creation, is found in the fact that ‘God 
breathed into him the breath of life,’ and in this 
it is intimated that in the act of becoming a 
living soul, man at the same time was endowed 
with higher capacities, which brought him into 
relationship with God, and made him capable of 
communing with Him, and so of risimg to a spir- 
itual existence. But the possibilities here in- 
volved for leading a true, spiritual life, could 
only be carried out by his abiding in fellowship 
with God and partaking of the Divine Spirit. 
And had this been maintained by obedience, 
there is every reason to believe that the higher 
life of the spirit would have glorified the lower 
and made it partaker of immortality without the 
intervention of death. But by reason of the 
Fall, this possibility was cut off, and man becom- 
ing animal (ψυχικός) or as our version renders it 
‘‘natural”’ in the very elements of his charac- 
ter, or in the springs of his existence, became 
at the same time mortal. Herein lay the neces- 
sity forthe new creation through the interven— 
tion of a Redeemer who shall be nothing less 
than a quickening spirit]. That the Apostle 
wished to have the following clause also, regarded 
as a scripture quotation, is an assumption as 
groundless as that the whole was taken out of 
the Apocrypha. That which was affirmed in 
scripture respecting the first man Adam, suggests 
to his mind the thought of Christ, the antitype 
of Adam; the lower plain upon which Adam 
was said to stand, points tothe higher. Already 
by the addition of the epithets “first” and 
«‘Adam,” the apostle gives us to recognize the 


significance of the scripture language, and intro- . 


duces the contrast which he wished to set up.— 
‘the last Adam, a quickening spirit.—‘ He 
attaches his own words directly to the passage 
from Scripture, as if to intimate, that the latter 
as necessarily followed from the former, accord- 
ing to its typical significance, as though it had 
been already spoken. He, therefore, merely 
gives expression to the inference which is im- 


889 





plied in the passage itself, without any intimation 
that it also did not belong to the language of 
Scripture—it being a self-evident result plainly 
contained there. (‘* Let a person read the first 
clause,” and man became a “living soul,” dwelling 
thoughtfully upon the expression ‘living soul,” 
and then repeat, ‘*the last Adam, a quickening 
spirit,’ somewhat less slowly and loud,” Mryer, 
Ed. 3.) The whole sentence, however, is by no 
means, to be regarded as a logical parenthesis, 
as though ver. 46, were to be connected immedi- 
ately with ver. 44; but it enters directly into 
the whole course of thought, and was designed 
to be a confirmation of the preceding statement 
(ver. 44) from Scripture, which, by its declara- 
tion in regard tothe first Man, that he became 
a living soul, from whence the soul-body or 
animal organization proceeded, points directly 


‘to that higher state which was first realized in 


the last Adam, viz., to the quickening Spirit on 
which the spiritual body was founded.—The 
adverb ‘*so” introduces the scripture text a- 
corresponding to that which had just been assert- 
ed and likewise confirming it. Adam’s becom- 
ing ‘‘a living soul” is represented as the effect 
of'God’s breathing into him ‘‘the breath of lives,” 
D’M Myv’3. This is the term used to 


express the principle of life taken absolutely, 
which has its source in the divine Spirit, of 
which the soul of man is the efflux forming the 
bond or nexus between his body and his spirit, 
[See Delitzsch, Ed. 2. Part II. Sec. 8, and Heard, 
Tripartite Natureof Man, p. 86—45]. The man, 
however, is FPP 652, ving soul, wherein 
aie to 


body and spirit meet in living union. By means 
of this union is he constituted and made capable 
of a spiritual life; or in other words, herein 
consists the foundation of his moral and intel- 
lectual culture and final glorification into a 
divine life (Beck, Seelenl., p. 9.) ‘This life of 
the spirit as it increases in intensity is destined 
to:make the soul, and by means of it the body 
likewise ever more and more, the proper image 
and exponent of itself, so that the two-fold life 
of man, as in a natural-and necessary way it has 
the soul for its uniting bond, so also in an 
ethical and voluntary way it has the spirit as an 
all-pervading and controlling principle.” [See 
Delitzsch, Part II. Sec. 5]. The first man, not as 
yet having transcended the character of a living 
soul (with which, however, sin must not as yet 
be supposed, nor even the necessity of its occur- 
rence, but only the susceptibility for it, Meyer, 
Ed. 8,) since his personal life, by a free act of 
his own, had not appropriated as it should the Di- 
vine life of the spirit, but had apostatized from 
it through sin, which ran its fatal course in sub- 
jecting man more and more to the power of death, 
required now a new beginning which should 
actually Jead to that glorification for which he 
was originally intended. This was to be achieved 
by such an appropriation of the Divine life of 
the Spirit that the result should be a quickening 
spirit. And thisis just what we find in the 
other and second Adam who winds up the history 
of the race; since soul and body are in Him 
thoroughly pervaded by the Divine life and He 
as the perfected and glorified One, has the power 
continually to beget this same life in others, and 


840 





so by renewing and transforming them, actually 
to develop the original capacities and intent of our 
common nature. ‘ But for the very reason that 
this quickening Spirit was obliged to assimilate 
every thing to itself, there arose a necessity for its 
bursting this earthly covering in order to fashion 
for itself a new andglorified organ.”” NEANDER. 
—Now, it is evident, that the point of time from 
which Christ became this “quickening Spirit” 
was, not His birth, but His resurrection ; for 
until that moment He was in the likeness of sin- 
ful flesh and had an animal body; and it was not 
until after He had solved the problem of main- 
taining the original sinlessness of the spirit 
through all the stages of His natural life in a 
world of sin, that He, who, by a living resem- 
blance, was the representative of a humanity 
that had become flesh in all its natural suscepti- 
bility to sin and death, became in like manner the 
representative and head of a humanity spiritu- 
ally and divinely glorified, by virtue of having 
glorified human nature through the power of 
the Spirit, and in the maintenance of a perfect 
obedience, and of thus having overcome the curse 
of sin (Beck, Lehrwiss., p. 465 ff. 472). The point of 
transition from the one to the other stage is His 
resurrection. Through this, in the very might 
of that love which led him to incur judgment and 
lay down His life for the deliverance of the lost, 
He became henceforth in His newly quickened 
and glorified corporeity the divine organ for 
that life-renewal, that quickening of the dead, 
which reaches its perfect realization at the res- 
urrection, and so, ‘‘a quickening spirit” (comp. 
Rom. viii. 11), The verb to be supplied is not ἐστίν, 
ws, but ἐγένετο, became. While it belongs to the 
soul to be only “living,” and that through the 
spirit; so, on the contrary, does it belong to the 
Spirit ‘‘to make alive,” to impart the divine life- 
power which it has in itself, er which it is in a 
personal way (Osiander and Meyer). As the 
expression, ‘‘the first man,’ designates the 
founder of the human race whose type is im- 
pressed upon all who spring from him, so does 
the expression, ‘‘the last Adam,” designate Him 
from whom issues the second final development 
of humanity that leads on to perfection. 

And now, since it were natural to wish that 
the perfect had existed from the beginning, he 
pruceeds to state the law of the divine order.— 
Howbeit, not first the spiritual, but the 
animal; afterward the spiritual.—Such is 
the established order in the development of hu- 
manity ; and this order he means to set forth as 
something necessary, [founded in the very plan 
of the entire creation, the analogies of which 
were to be seen everywhere. Nature, through 
all the stages of existence, forms an ever-ascend- 
ing series. In all the realms of life we mount 
from the lowest organizations to those more re- 
fined and complete. Why this was so ordered, 
the apostle does not pretend to say. The reason 
for it is deeper than science can go, and is among 
the hidden things of the Eternal Wisdom. All 
that Paul means to assert here is, that such is 
the order required by the general constitution of 
things]. First, the earthly nature must needs 
manifest itself in Adam, and then only could it 
attain afterwards to a higher development 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





(Neander). The adjectives, ‘‘ spiritual” and 
“animal,” had better be taken here in a general 
way, as designating different stages of life, with- 
out supplying the noun ‘“‘ body.” —That the natu- 
ralis first, and then the spiritual, is shown in 
the instances of the two great heads of humani 

ty.—The first man (is) of the earth, earthy; 
—By the epithet ‘‘ earthy,” which relates to the 
body, and nut to the whole man as imbued with 
earthly affections, he designates that physical 
conformation which corresponds to his origin as 
taken from the earth. With this is connected 
the animal state. But the inward quickening of 
the body, which proceeds primarily from the 
spirit, does not take place directly ; but through 
the operation of the soul, which, in man, by 
virtue of the breath of the Creator; is, as it were, 
formed out of the essence of the spirit in the 
body (Beck, Seelent., p. 81). Now, inasmuch as 
in the creation of the first man there existed, 
first of all, a body fashioned out of the dust of 
the earth, this, at the start, could only bear the, 
impress of the soul, which mediated the quicken- 
ing power of the spirit. And such a body car- 
ries in itself the possibility of death, which, 
however, is only realized through sin (Gen. iii. 
19; Comp. Rom. v. 12ff.), ἡ. ¢., the alienation of 
the soul, which determines the condition of the 
body, from the Divine Spirit-life. Apart from 
this, however, it has the possibility also of not 
dying, which might have been realized through 
the perpetual appropriation of this spirit-life 
by means of which, as the soul advanced in 
spiritual glorification, it would become ever more 
qualified for the progressive quickening and 
glorification of the body (comp. Osiander, p. 777). 
As the antithesis we have—the second man 
is from heaven.—The fuller reading of the 
received text, ‘‘the Lord from heaven,” is op- 
posed by an overwhelming balance of authorities ; 
and the rejection of the words ‘“‘the Lord” is 
not to be explained on the ground that it did not 
seem to suit as the proper centrast for ‘‘ earthy.” 
It is far more likely that some transcribers at- 
tempted to fill out what appeared to be an im- 
perfect antithesis, by adding ‘‘the Lord” in the 
margin by way of a gloss, and that this after- 
wards crept into the text. By the term ‘‘Lord” 
(which would belong not to the subject, but to 
the predicate, and as the nobler designation 
would be put before the other), there would be 
exhibited the divine glory, the supramundane 
exaltation and power of the second man coming 
from heaven, in contrast with the earthly imper- 
fection and weakness of the first man springing 
from the earth; and this certainly would not 
simply refer to his bodily life, but to his entire 
personality, which carries in itself the fulness of 

the spirit, and of divinely quickening power; from 
which, then, it might be inferred in regard to 
the expression “earthy,” that it denoted the 
earthly constitution and characteristics of the 
entire person of the first man.—In the case of 

the shorter reading, however, the question arises 
whether it means the heavenly origin of the see- 
ond Man, in relation to His human life; which, 

then, in case the term ‘earthy’ refers to the 

body of the first man, might be referred in like 

manner to Christ’s corporeity (hence the hereti- 


CHAP. XV. 35-50. 


_— 


eal assumption that Christ’s body was from hea- 
ven) ;* or whether it means the final appearing of 
the second man, His second advent, for the perfec- 
tion of His work, of which the resurrection of 
the dead isa part. The whole context appears 
to imply the latter (comp. vv. 22, 28, 45, 49).+ 
What is here meant, therefore, is His coming 
from Heaven at His second Advent, which will 
take place in celestial. glory and in His trans- 
figured humanity. And this presents to us the 
real antithesis to the earthiness of the first man. 

The following verses express the fact that the 
peculiar qualities of each of these two heads are 
reflected in those of the persons who belong to 
them severally, viz., in respect to the natural 
body on the one side, and the spiritual body on 
the other. This is what is meant by dco¢ and 
7T0L0vT0t.—As the earthy, such they also 
that are earthy :—By the latter are meant those 
who have descended from Adam, and like him 
are of an earthy nature.—and as the heavenly, 
such they also that are heavenly.—By the 
latter are meant those belonging to Christ in 
their state of heavenly perfection, or those who 
are taken up with Christ, the glorified, in the 
fellowship of His glorified life in heaven. Comp. 
Eph. ii. 6, ‘‘and hath made us sit together in 
heavenly places in Christ Jesus; and Phil. iii. 
20, ‘‘Our citizenship is in heaven;” to which 
may be added still further, ver. 21. ‘Who shall 
change our vile body, that it may be fashioned 
like unto His glorious body.” The latter is here 
carried out in ver. 49, in the same antithesis as 
in ver. 48.—And as we bore,—namely, during 
our earthly life,—the image of the earthy,— 
z. e., the animal body (Phil. iii. 21, ‘“‘the body of 
our humiliation”)—we shall bear—namely, 
at the time of His appearing, from the resurrec- 
tion onward,—the image of the heavenly.— 
t. 6., the spiritual body which is made like unto 
His glorious body. In the verbs ἐφορέσαμεν 
and gopécopmev, he places himself and his 
readers at the turning point of the second Advent, 
when they will have the life which they led in 
their earthy state behind them, and that of their 
heavenly state just before them.—¢opeiv,—an 
image taken from dress. It means 10 wear asa 
garment; it occurs also in tragedy in relation to 
bodies (φορεῖν δέμας), and particular parts of the 
body, such asthe hair. The more feebly attested 
reading φορεσομεὲν, we shall’ bear, corresponds to 
the entire connection and force of thought. The 
other, φορέσωμεν, let us bear, would introduce a 
paranesis, which would constrain us to take the 
word ‘‘image” in an ethical sense. So Chrys., 
and Theoph.: “By the image of the earthy he 
means evil deeds, and by the image ot the heav- 





*(“This passage was used by the early heretics of the 
Gnostic to sustain their doctrine that our Lord was not 
really born of the Virgin Mary, but was clothed in a body 
derived from Heaven; in opposition to whom the early 
creeds declare that He was as to His human nature consub- 
stantial with man, and as to His divine nature consubstan- 
tial with God.” Hopax]. 


} [This is the view given by Meyer and other commenta- 
tors, both ancient and modern. But Bloomfield, and Alford, 
and Hodge, and de Wette, and many others, prefer the refer- 
ence to the heavenly origin of His entire personality as the 
God-Man. This view is ably supported by Bp. Bull, in his 
Jud. Eccl. Cathol. y. 5, and is also rendered probable from 
Jno. iii. 18, where the Son of Man is spoken of as “ He that 
tame down from Heaven.” ] 











341 











enly, good deeds.”’ It isin connection with this 
reading also that the following verse is inter- 
preted in an ethical sense, which, however, is in 
contradiction with the uniform usage of the 
words ‘‘flesh and blood.” Perhaps, however, it 
was the ethical interpretation of ver. 50, that 
gave rise to the reading. ([Stanley, in obedience 
to the preponderance of authority, gives prefer 
ance to the hortatory form of this sentence, 
which he acknowledges to be in no connection 
with the context]. 

Ver. 50. He here winds up the whole of this 
exposition respecting the body in which believeys 
should come forth, and confirms the declaration, 
«we shall bear the image of the heavenly,” by a 
solemn asseveration.—Now this I say,—It is 
a formula for emphasizing a subsequent state- 
ment, and implies no concession to his opponents. 
671, aS in chap. vii. 29, not ‘because,’ but,— 
that—Ver. 49 rests on ver. 45, not on that 
which here follows.—flesh and blood—By 
these words, according to-Theodoret, are intended 
[not our sinful, fallen nature, as some, like 
Chrys,, understand it construing the words in an 
ethical sense ; but] our mortal nature, which, as 
such—cannot inherit the kingdom of God; 
—or, as Lange, ‘the constitution originating in 
natural birth.” It is the animal body in its 
present organization. ‘‘Flesh” denotes the 
earthly substance of the ‘‘body and blood,” the 
animal element in it, according to its corruptible 
nature. That this corporeal constitution cannot 
enter the kingdom of God without change, is 
still further shown from the incompatibility be- 
tween the two.—neither doth corruption in- 
herit incorruption.-—Corruption, notas distinct 
from flesh and blood, as the dead are distin- 
guished from the living; but the word exhibits 
to us prominently a characteristic of our present 
state, which sets it in marked contrast with the 
constitution of the kingdom of God, as that of an 
imperishable life—¢ ϑόρα is here the abstract for 
the concrete φϑάρτον. The present κληρονομεῖ 
expresses a constant relation (Meyer), and an 
established truth. The idea of time is not here 
taken into account. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Skepticism would fain wear the aspect of an 
enlightenment that transcended the ordinary 
scope of faith, of a more comprehensive and 
loftier view‘of the world which was justified in 
looking down upon a belief in the doctrines of 
revelation as a sign of narrowness and bigotry. 
But, regarded rightly, the narrowness will be 
found on its part. It is skepticism that betrays 
a lack of sound reason, which, at the same time, 
includes a lack in the higher moral constitution. 
There lies at the foundation of it a dullness of 
thought, 4 dislike for the labor of profound con- 
templation, a disposition to be readily satisfied 
with what is most obvious, and to abide within 
the wonted circle of human notions. Nay, still 
more, there is at the bottom of it a pride of un- 
derstanding which delights in the supposed dis- 
coveries of truth, and is opposed to the acknowl- 
edgment of a wisdom surpassing its own range of 
thought and opinion—even a wisdom to which it 
is the business and duty of the human unders 


842 





standing to submit, cordially accepting its doc- 
trines and endeavoring to understand them more 
and more, if it is ever properly to come to itself, 
since it here enters upon its own proper ground, 
the Spirit of God, and in the light of truth is 
enabled to recognize more and more, on every 
side, the nature and laws of Divine providence, 
and the manifold ways of God, and the corres- 
pondencies which exist between the natural cre- 
ation in its varied developments and the king- 
dom of grace or the work of redemption in all 
its rich unfolding. 

2. The resurrection of the dead, stands in close 
analogy with various phenomena which constant- 
ly present themselves to our notice, and in which 
the creative omnipotence of God displays itself 
from year to year. In these death, dissolution, 
and corruption, are seen to be the conditions of a 
new life—stages of transition to new forms of 
existence. The kernel contained in the ripened 
fruit, conceals a vital germ, which, when the 
kernel is planted in the soil and there dissolved, 
bursts forth and springs up into a new growth in 
conformity with the constitution originally given 
it by the Creator, and by means of His ever- 
present, everywhere active, power. Essentially 
the same process occurs in the resurrection of 
the dead. Corruption is only the dissolution of 
that which was the result of a previous vital de- 
velopment, in order that the germ of a new 
body which was included in the inmost kernel 
of the old, may break forth and unfold itself into 
anew and living organism. But the new is not 
[as some suppose, the restoration of the old, a 
recomposition of the same particles that existed 
in the old body,] but of another and nobler 
quality [and better suited to be the organ of a 
perfectly sanctified spirit]. In the resurrection 
body we enter upon a distinct and higher stage 
of life than that occupied by the body which has 
been laid in the earth. [The apostle calls it «a 
building of God, a house not made with hands” 
in contrast with the former, in which, as the seat 
of pain, and suffering, and sin, we groaned 
being burdened. What its particular attributes 
and peculiarities are, it doth not yet appear. It 
is sufficient for us to know, that it will be like 
unto Christ’s glorious body; and from the hints 
afforded us in the account given of His several 
appearances to His disciples, we may obtain 
some idea of its superior adaptation for the service 
of the spirit]. It must be understood that we 
are here speaking only of those who have been 
taken unto a fellowship with the new divine life 
in Jesus Christ, and have come within the sphere 
of His redeeming grace ; or, in other words, who 
belong to that new development which proceeds 
from the last Adam. [What the condition of 
those will be who are to come forth to the resur- 
rection of damnation, we are not here informed, 
and on this point to offer conjecture would be to 
go beyond our province]. 

This higher stage of corporeal existence has 
its analogies in the broad range of creation; 
since here also, we behold manifold distinctions 
and degrees of organization, as well in the 
sphere of animal life as among the higher orders 
of being, including man and angels, and also 
among the celestial bodies shining with varied 
glory. Somewhat corresponding to the distine- 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ee 


tions here observable, will be the superiority of 
the resurrection-body in the comparison with 
the earthly body—a superiority, which viewed in 
the contrasts presented at the time of death and 
of resurrection, is expressed in the antithesis 
between corruption and incorruption, weakness 
and power, dishonor and glory. 

ὃ. The resurrection as illustrated by the account 
of the divine planin man’s creation. Much light is 
cast upon the great distinction between the pres- 
ent and the resurrection-body, by the divinely 
revealed economy of the Creator, or, in other 
words, by the divinely ordained development of 
the human race, as set forth in Scripture. The 
all-quickening Spirit of God first produced a 
creature with a living soul. The soul, as the 
vehicle and instrument of his life-power, by 


_which being quickened, the earthly body pre- 


pared for it by God becomes animal or psychical, 
ἃ. 86. conformed to the character of the soul, is 
the organism of a personal life which is capable 
either of appropriating to itself ever more and 
more that divine spiritual life in which it is 
rooted, or of apostatizing from it. In the case of 
apostasy, such as actually occurred, instead of a 
progressive glorification of the earthly, physical 
body into a heavenly, spiritual one, there would 
ensue a progressive mortality and corruption, 
And such man has already incurred. Neverthe- 
less, that condition for which he was originally 
constituted and destined, was still bound to come 
to pass. Through a Divine act of love, a new 
process of development was introduced into the 
human race, which, as in the first instance, en- 
tered into life through the quickening power of 
the divine Spirit, and in the like manner, in- 
volved the possibility of a free self-determina- 
tion in both directions, 7. 6., a true human life 
according to soul and body. But by a style of 
conduct opposed to that pursued in the first 
stage of development or by its head, the first 
Adam—by the perpetual appropriation and main- 
tenance of the divine, spiritual life amid all 
the temptations of our lower nature, and amid 
all the difficulties, struggles and necessities which 
attended upon a loving entrance into the accursed | 
state of the first Adamic humanity, this reached a 
height upon which the animal nature, glorified 
into a truly spiritual condition, becomes the 
principle of a like glorification for the earthly 
animal race of man (in so far as this enters into 
the fellowship of the second Adam), so that every- 
thing which had been corrupted by means of 
sin is again restored, and aims at rising to the 
highest stage of life which had been ordained 
from the beginning as the proper goal of all 
human endeavor, but which had become unat- 
tainable after the apostasy. Now after that we 
have become incorporated into the second Adam 
by faith, by means of which His Spirit as an 
inwardly sanctifying power takes possession of 
our personal life, and delivers it from all selfish- 
ness, and all entanglement with our earthly 
sensuous being, and attracts it with all its pow- 
ers and entire organism into the service of the 
Divine life, and assimilates it to that; there 
then follows, as the natural completion of this 
process, an unfolding of the germ of this Divine 
spiritual life that has been implanted in this or- 
ganism (after the process of dying which be 


CHAP. XV. 35-50. 





longed to the old Adamic state, has been gone 
through with) into a new organism which cor- 
responds to the glorified body of the second 
Adam. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarxe:—Ver. 35. Hepincer: ShallI rise 
again out of the grave, the dust, the fire, the 
abyss of the sea, and appear in beauty and 
glory? Reason says, No. Oh, blindness! Ask 
the beautiful fruit-bearing stalk, what and where 
it was a short time ago.—Ver. 86. ‘Thou fool.” 
Paul here calls conceited reason by its right 
name, in order to rebuke unbelief (Gal. iii. 1). 
To him who believes in the infinite knowledge, 
wisdom and power of God, and in the creation 
where God brought all things out of nothing, it 
will not be hard to believe that God knows where 
every little particle of dust of this or that body 
or member is, and how that which has been 
mingled in with the seeds of other bodies is to 
be again separated from them, and how each 
particle is to be brought again to its place, so 
that each body may be the same body.* If it is 
possible that a corrupted little seed of corn shall 
spring up to new life and verdure, and bring forth 
new kernels, although thy reason cannot com- 
prehend how this can happen; then it is not im- 
possible that God should quicken again the 
bodies that have been dissolyed.—There is such 
a depth and breath in the works of God, that 
our feeble understanding becomes lost in them, 
even as a little drop of water is swallowed up in 
the great sea.—Ver. 8571, That the nature of 
every plant, with all its peculiarities is included 
in the little seed-corn, and springs from that, is 
certainly a work of God’s wisdom and omnipo- 
tence. If He now produces from the buried 
kernel a particular plant which bears upon its 
stalk many other like kernels, how can we doubt 
that God would be both able and willing, ac- 
cording to His own infinite power, to bring forth 
out of the seed of a decaying human body a like 
result once more? (Luke xviii. 27.)—Ver. 43. 
The most beautiful of mankind, during their 
whole life, are but dirt, and are obliged to con- 
ceal much that they have both upon and in 
themselves; but the resurrection will glorify all 
that, and render our bodies perfectly pure ves- 
sels.—Ver. 45. We must carry about with us 
this mortal body in humility, endure it with 
patience, and let it die with fresh courage. In 
this way we rightly labor towards transforming 
it into that glorious and spiritual body which we 
expect from the second Adam.—Ver. 47. Hrpin- 
GER: Since the earthly Adam, endowed with 
earthly attributes, came first, and the second 
spiritual Adam followed after, so must that body 
which we inherit from Adam first be earthly and 
born, ere it become spiritual according to the 
image of the second Adam.—Ver. 48. Every 
thing in its own time—the body must first lay 
off its earthly qualities through death, and after 
that spring up anew.—What at last is born anew 
at the resurrection—should not this be glorious ? 
Ver. 49. Here upon earth the glory of the 


* (This comment is founded on the false assumption once 
80 prevalent, that the identity of the present and the resur- 
rection bodies was to consist in the identity of the material 
particles out of which the present body is composed]. 


844 





divine image mirrors itself in believers to some 
degree; but at the resurrection they will possesg 
all this glory in its perfection.—Ver. 50. Per- 
haps thou wouldst gladly journey on to heaven 
with thy body and soul without dying, and so © 
inherit its glory (2. Cor. v. 4); but that which is 
to live there must first perish, ere it be made anew. 

BeRLeNB. Brpet:—Ver. 35f. Man takes too 
much upon his phantasy, and means to see 
every thing thereby. Happily such are first point- 
ed to the operations of Nature. For the lower 
and thetransient world is an image of the higher 
and the enduring. If such wise spirits would 
investigate more exactly the operations of Na- 
ture, this would enable them to read in living 
characters, what follies they, with their wisdom 
perpetrate beforeGod. Even in natural things 
we do not succeed in understanding how one 
thing and another transpires; and how much 
more will this be the case in heavenly mys- 
teries (Wisdom ix. 16).—It is a folly which 
emanates from the pool of our corrupt 
hearts to be always inquiring—‘how? how?’ 
If we take our reason only with us and 
use it "beyond its proper limits, it turns to un- 
reason. We should learn to understand that 
things come from a higher hand, and abide in 
the way of faith.—Ver. 37. The outer hulls do 
not germinate, but are sloughed off from the 
inner germ, decay and mix with earth; but the 
germ itself springs up again in living green. 
Accordingly it is not precisely the same body 
with all its dust that is torise again. Yea, even 
during this life, this mortal body is subject to a 
perpetual change, so that in a short time not one 
particle of that which we once were, remains in 
us, [so it is not necessary in maintaining the 
identity of the body to preserve the same mate- 
rial particles of which it was at any one time 
composed]. Though our bodies are in continual 
flux, yet no one says that we become new men 
every quarter of a year.—Ver. 38. The best is 
concealed in order that we may not confound 
Nature with God. Nature hides itself. There 
God alone is master, and has the key. If we do 
not go to Him we shall bring nothing out.—Ver. 
44, We must not draw our conclusions from 
one body to another, and say: A body is a 
body. No; great distinctions exist among 
bodies. There isa spiritual body which is through 
and through like pure spirit, as well as a nat- 
ural and beastly body.—Ver. 45. God has crea- 
ted men not purely spiritual, in order that they 
may not exalt themselves, but ever be mindful 
of their dependence. The natural life is, in re- 
spect to the other life, only as a field; but in the 
field a spiritual seed is sown which shall hereaf- 
ter spring up through the power of the second 
Adam,—Ver. 46. The state of weakness comes 
first: otherwise, we would not know how to esteem 
that of highest glory, nor yet to distinguish 
between the two. Hence, this order is good; 
and he who takes it into account will avoid the 
miserable snares which are spread by reason.— 
Ver. 47. The first and the second man—these_ 
two are as wide asunder in their nature as hea- 
ven and earth, yea, as God and the creature; 
and yet one has come to the other, so that we 
have share in both.—Ver. 48. We must not 
become more earthly than Adam was. ‘The 


844 





Heavenly Adam was provided in order that we may 
and should again erect ourselves upon Him. In 
this way, then, do those that are heavenly spring 
from Him by a new birth and life in Him. But 
if this is to happen, our old earthly man, must 
and will, in thought, word, work, become uni- 
ted to Christ, in his sufferings and death, and 
the new man arise in us.—This is the great mys- 
tery, on account of which God became man, and 
proposes now to exhibit us as the children of 
God through His incarnation. 

Riecer:—Ver. 35 ff. In inquiring after the 
exact ground, how any event comes to pass, every 
thing for the most part turns upon the intention 
of the inquirer—whether he inquire froma desire 
of learning, and a delight in the truth, or from 
doubt and pleasure in mocking; whether he does 
it from faith and for the sake of advancing in 
knowledge. or simply to find pretext for unbelief. 
The difficulty in respect to the resurrection is 
the dying and the dissolutton; but this, indeed, 
in a thousand cases, is the only way to new life 
and verdure, and fruitfulness. This thou wouldst 
question, if thou hadst not seen it so often.—It is 
enough that now the way through death to life 
is so pictured before our eyes. What God does 
daily and yearly in the realm of Nature, this He 
does in the kingdom of His Son, for the destruc- 
tion of the last enemy. Let the change and ex- 
pansion and manifold increase in the seed that 
is sown be what it may, yet all this has had its 
ground and cause in the seed itself. Even so the 
resurrection is but a quickening and up-spring- 
ing of that very thing which has died.—What 
else is the denial of the resurrection but an ig- 
noring of the power of God, which can produce 
out of its inexhaustible fulness just what it will. 
Ver. 42 ff. Precious foundation for our patience, 
—to suffer under the body of this death, because 
the germ of a future spiritual body exists therein! 
How deep down into the inheritance of Adam: 
until thou returnest again to dust! How highly 
exalted in the inheritance of Christ: until we 
shall become like unto His glorious body! Lord 
Jesus, prepare me that I may bear thy heavenly 
image.—Ver. 50. The natural life which we 
have in common with other living creatures upon 
the soil of earth, is not fit for the kingdom of 
God; it would be far too weak to sustain the 
powers in exercise there. 

Hevpner:—Ver. 35. All question after the 
how in the mysterious doctrines of religion must 
be asked with modesty, with a recognition of the 
limits of our knowledge, with the design of 
warding off unbelief and strengthening faith ; 
and hence, not in those cases where all compre- 
hension on our part is absolutely denied. Close 
reflection, strictly carried out, will never stumble 
at revelation.—Ver. 87. The present and the 
tuture life are related as germ and fruit; hence, 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





the resurrection is not the creation of a new or- 
ganism. The study of fiature should help reve- 
lation, and should lead us to the Lord of Nature 
and + » Giver of Revelation. Especially does 
the ever-recurring change from death to life, 
which we see in nature, assist a Christian’s faith 
in the resurrection.—Ver. 39 ff. The inexhaus- 
tible manifoldness of the kingdom of God opens 
to our contemplation an unfathomable sea.—Ver. 
42 ff. The fundamental stuff remains, but de- 
velopment gives it another body. We know 
nothing of the innermost, finest parts of the 
body, and it is from these that the main stuff of 
the future body is formed. Since the heavenly 
body will not be like the earthly, it will be no 
burden to man. Finite spirits also must neces- 
sarily have an organ (contrary to Kant).—Ver. 
45 ff. Christ, the Regenerator of man, gives the 
spiritual life—He creates in us not only the new 
life of regeneration, but His spirit and His power 
will directly quicken our bodies. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 47. Great is the miracle 
of creation, by which God called the first man 
out of the earth into a natural life; but greater 
still is the miracle of Redemption, by which God 
has created a spiritual body, of which the sinful, 
earthly children of the sinful, earthly Adam were 
utterly destitute. Although now the work of re- 
demption is greater than the work of creation, 
yet is it not more difficult to believe that the Lord 
will make our natural body a spiritual body, ac- 
cording to the likeness of His perfected spiritual 
body, than it is to believe that He made our nat- 
ural body from a clump of earth?—Ver. 49. The 
true Christophori, or Christ-bearers, are Chris- 
tians, here, in faith; there, in sight.—Ver. 50. 
The flesh and blood of the lost may and will rise, 
not to the inheritance of the kingdom, but to 
suffer the pain of eternal fire. But, in order 
that flesh and blood may rise to the inheritance 
of the kingdom, the present form of flesh and 
blood must be done away; first, through spiritual 
regeneration in baptism, and then through the 
physical change in the grave, in order that a 
spiritual flesh and blood may spring therefrom, 
according to the fashion of the flesh and blood of 
Christ.—The Christian burial is the blessing of 
the body to be redeemed from corruption (Rom. 
viii. 23). 

[Rosertson: — Vy. 46-49. The natural pre- 
cedes the spiritual. I. The universality of this 
law, as seen: 1. In the order of creation; 2. In 
the progress of the Jewish nation; 8. In the 
progress of the human race. II. The spiritual 
instances of this law: 1. Our natural affections 
precede our spiritual; 2. The moral precedes 
the spiritual. III. The stages through which 
we pass: 1. Through temptation; 2. Through - 
sorrow ]. 


————<— 


CHAP. XV. 51-58. 345 


D. Conclusion in reference to those who survive at the advent. Final exhortations. 


CHAP. XV. 51-58. 


Behold, I shew [tell, λέγω] you a mystery; We shall notall sleep [We all shall not 
sleep, πάντες οὐ xotp7 9.1], but we shall all be changed.’ In a moment [an atom, ἀτόμῳ], 
in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the 
dead shall be raised? incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible 
must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So [But, de], 
when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption,’ and this mortal shall have put 
on immortality,’ then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is [was, 
χατεπόϑη] swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave [death, 
ϑάνατε], where is thy victory ?* [But, δὲ] The sting of death 7s sin; and the strength 
of sin is the law. But thanks le to God, which giveth us the victory‘ through our 
Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable, 
always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know [knowing, εἰδότες 
that your labour is not in vain in the Lord. 


51 
52 


53 
54 


55 
56 
57 
58 


[2 Ver. 51.—The Rec. is satisfactorily authenticated, [πάντες μέν οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγησόμεθα]. The 
origin of the other readings is easily explained from the apparent difficulty of‘this. Lachmann [and Stanley] have πάντες 
[μὲν] κοιμηθησόμεθα, ov πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγ. Others have πάντες μὲν ἀναστησόμεθα., οὐ πάντες δὲ addAay. [The μὲν has in 
its favor A. C. (2d. hand), D. (2d and 3d hand), Εἰ. F. α. K. L. Sinait., Vulg.. later Syr., Copt., and a few eccles. writers, but 
against it B. C. (1st hand), D. (1st hand), the Syr. (Pesch.), Aeth., and Orig. Jerome testifies that in his day all the Latins 
had omnes quidem resurgemus, but that the Greeks were divided between omnes dormiemus, and non omnes dormiemus. 
Augustine also mentions that both Greeks anid Latins were divided about it. It was very likely to have originated in an 
attempted conformity with the subsequent dé. For placing the ov before κοιμηθ., so that it may qualify that word, and not 
after, with the comma before it, so that it may qualify aAAay., we have B. D. (2d and 3d hand), E. K. L., almost all the 
cursives, with the Goth., Syr., (both), Copt., Aeth., Arab. versions, and many of the best Greek and Latin writers. Among 
the other MSS. there is an almost inextricable confusion, suggesting that they are not reliable. They appear to have 
sprung from the idea that otherwise Paul would assert (contrary to fact) that he, and those to whom he wrote, were not 
todie. See all the readings discussed elaborately in Reiche and Tischendorf—cC. P. W.] 

2 Ver. 52—Lachmann has ἀναστήσονται, but the evidence for that reading is not quite convincing. [It is sustained by 
A.D. Ἐπ. F.G., 2 cursives, Orig. (one ms.), Chrys. (one ms.), Damasc., Theophyl. (marg.); but B. C. K. L. M., Sinait., several 
copies of the Latin, Vulg. (resurgunt), Orig. (5 times), Dialog., Chrys. (one ms.), Cyr., Theodt., have ἐγερθήσονται.---Ο. P. W.] 

[8 Ver 54.—The whole sentence τὸ φθαρτὸν τ. ἐνδύσ. αφθαρσ. και is omitted in C. (1st hand), Sinait., (Ist hand), 2 cur- 
sives, the Vulg., Goth., Copt., Aeth. (both), Marcion (in Epiph.), Athan., Iren. (Lat.), Hilar., Aug. (once), Ambrst., Fulg., 
Oros., Bede. By A., the Arm., version, and,some unimportant MSS., it is inserted after τὸ θνητ. τ. ἐνδύς. ἀθαν.; Ὁ. (Ist hand, 
not in the Lat. Ist hand), entirely omits this latter sentence. Doubtless by homceoteleuton.—C. P. W.] 

4 Ver. 55.—_The κέντρον and νῖκος are arranged in the reverse crder by a number of good MSS. [B.C. J. M. Sinait. (1st 
hand), Vulg., Copt. Aeth., Arm., Slav., Eus., Athan., Didym., Cyr., Damasc., Iren. (Lat.), Tert., Jer., Ambr.] This was done 
probably, to make the sentence conform to the Septuagint. Such, too, was doubtless the origin of the substitution of 
ἄδη for the second θάνατε [in A. (2d hand), K. L. M. Sinait., (8d hand), several cursives, the Goth., Syr. (both), Orig., 
Athan. (once), Cyr., Epiph. For θάνατε twice we have B. C. Ὁ. E. F. G. I., 2 cursives, the Ital., Vulg., Copt., Aeth., Arm., 
Euseb., Athan. (once), Nyss., Iren.(Lat.), Tertul.,Cypr., Ambr., August. Wordsworth, gives as a reason for the change of ᾷδη 
into θάνατε, that the primitive Christians, who would not be surprised at a personification of θάνατος, would have been 
shocked at such 2 bold apostrophe as the Apostle here derived from his Hebrew Scriptures to Hades, on the ground that 
it would countenance the heathen notion of a personal deity so named.—C. P. W.} 


was, that those who are alive at the coming of 
the Lord will experience a change that shall fit 
them for participating in the kingdom of God, 
just as those would who arose from the dead ; 
hence, that that which was said in ver. 49 was 
applicable also to them. The same truth is set 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 51. He now proceeds to reveal to them 
something of the process of the resurrection. 
And what he has to say is introduced in a man- 


ner solemn, and calculated to awaken attention. 
—Behold,—tThe word points to an object pre- 
sented for inward contemplation, and at the same 
time extraordinary, g. d., ‘behold, look my 
words full in the face—they contain a truth 
which we are slow to recognize, but which is 
true notwithstanding.’ The thing to be an- 
nounced he calls—a mystery —not simply 
“something hitherto unknown to the reader, but 
something ascertained only through a divine 
revelation, or the illumination of the Spirit (iv. 
1; xiii. 2).—tell I unto you:—This mystery 


forth in 1 Thes. xy. 1-17, save that the idea of 
a change, which, in the latter text, is only pre- 
supposed, is, in our passage, definitely brought 
to view. In both places he gives his readers to 
understand that the disclosure made rested upon 
revelation (1 Thes. iv. 15, ‘‘by the word of the 
Lord”’).—The received text of our passage has, 
from the earliest time, created difficulty.* It 





*[(Calvin remarks: “There is here no difference in the 
Greek MSS. [which is true, so far as those he had to deal 
with went], but in the Latin versions there are three differ- 
ent readings. The first is, We shall, indeed, all die, but we 


846 





seems to assert that the Apostle expected, not 
death, but a sudden change both for himself and 
for all his cotemporaries—a thing not reconcila- 
ble with actual events. Hence, ov has been put 
after κοιμηϑησόμεῦνϑ α, connecting it with the 
following verb; [so Stanley, who renders: ‘we 
shall all sleep, but we shall not all be changed’’] 
(besides, some put οὖν before κού μῃ ϑ, which is, 
perhaps, only a trace of the original position of 
ov); but this reading would be unsuitable by 
reason of the more exactly defining statement of 
time, immediately following in ver. 52, which 
could only be joined toa positive clause. [It 
would hardly do to say, ‘we shall not all be 
changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye,’ 
etc. It was perhaps with a view of obviating this 
difficulty that the reading ἀναστησόμεϑα, we shall 
arise, [found in D., and adopted by the vulgate], 
was introduced; but which even in this way be- 
trays its non-authenticity, and, besides, is less 
sustained. In the case of the received text, 
πάντες μὲν ov κοιμηϑησόμεϑα, πάντες 
δὲ ἀλλαχησόμεϑ a,—there still arises, how- 
ever, the objection, that the apostle could not 
assert concerning himself and al/ his readers, or 
all Christians of his time that they would not 
“sleep,” but would rather all ‘be changed,” 
[as is implied here by the position of the nega- 
tive ov, which bears directly upon the verb, and 
not upon the adjective πάντες alli—making it 
mean, ‘all of us shall not sleep’]. Hence, a tra- 
jection of the negative is here assumed, πάντες 
ov, standing for ov πάντες, and the clause taken 
to be equivalent to ov πάντες κοιμηϑ'... meaning 
not all of us shall sleep;’? and ἀλλαγησόμεϑα 
is interpreted in a broader sense, as including 
the idea of rising from the dead, which is op- 
posed by the stricter signification of the term, 
and by the more exact intimation given in ver. 52, 
where it is said that the dead also shall rise. 
Nor yet can the above-mentioned trajection of 
the negative be justified on the ground of giving 
the word πάντες, all, a more emphatic position, 
or from Numb. xxiii. 13; Josh. xi. 13 or Sir. 
xvii. 30 (where it does not occur); and, besides, 
the assumption of a various range of meaning 
for ἀλλαγησόμεϑα in such close succession 
has something arbitrary in it. The same is true 
also of the expedient of putting οὐ kor unt, not 
sleep, in ἃ parenthesis, g. d., ‘we all (shall, in- 
deed, not die, but yet) all shall be changed. 
[So Hodge, who, as above, broadens the scope of 
the verb rendered ‘changed,’ so as to denote not 
simply the transformation of the living, but also 
the reinvestiture of the dead, thus making it 
apply to all Christians generally. Stanley is 
singularly confused here, following Lachmann 
in his text, and rendering “we shall all sleep; 
but we shall not all be changed ;’ yet, in his 
note, giving a decided preference for the Ree. 
Text, and rendering it, ‘* We shall, all of us, not 
die, but be changed.” In the latter he follows 
Meyer and Winer (Gr. Gram, Pt. iii. 3 61, 4f.) 





shall not all be changed. The second is, We shall, indeed, 
all rise again, but we shall not all be changed. [This is the 
reading of the Vulgate followed by Wickliffe and the Rheim’s 
version.) The third is, We shall not, indeed, all sleep, but 
we shall all be changed.” This diversity he ascribes to the 
fact, “ that some readers, who are not the most discerning, 
dissatisfied with the true reading, ventured to conjecture a 
reading which was more approved by them”). 


‘of death and the resurrection. 





THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





who insist that the only translation consistent 
with Greek is as Kling gives it in his version— 
We shall all not sleep, but we shall be 
changed,—The intention of the apostle is to 
answer a question, which would naturally occur 
to some in view of the declaration that * flesh 
and blood could not inherit the kingdom of God.” 
If this were so, it might be asked, what would 
become of the living? While the dead would 
rise with new bodies, what would become of 
them who were expecting to survive till the ad- 
vent. These are the parties whom he now has 
solely in his eye, and since the great crisis was 
supposed to be near at hand, he speaks here in 
the first person, and says ‘we.’]. The difficulty 
in regard to πάντες, all, is relieved by the sup- 
position that he had in mind the swm total of the 
survivors (among whom he also reckoned him- 
self), to whom alone the whole context relates. 
But that the words wév dé should stand in 
connection with the same emphatically repeated © 
word πάντες, all, when they appear to relate to 
the contrast between ‘not sleeping’ and ‘ being 
changed,’ is entirely in accordance with Greek 
usage (comp. Passow upon the words II. i. 176, 
b, above). They had better remain untrans- 
lated.—By ‘ being changed’ he indicates the im- 
mediate transition from the earthly into the 
heavenly body, without the intervening process 
This is to take 
place—In a moment, in the twinkling of 
an eye,—Both these expressions indicate the 
same thing, and set forth, in a most striking 
manner, the instantaneousness of the transition, 
excluding the possibility of death coming in be- 
tween. drouov,an indivisible point of time. In 
this change a prevenient qualification, a prepara- | 
tion for this glorification, by the operation of the 
Spirit of Christ, is indeed not excluded; it is 
only asserted that this glorification would take 
place suddenly.—A second particular relating to 
the time of this change, is expressed by the 
words—at tHe last trump :—év τῇ icy. σάλπ.; 
ἐν is used as expressive of the time ἐπ which the 
last trumpet sounds, asin 1 Thes. iv. 16, where 
it is said of the Lord that He will descend from 
Heaven ἐν σάλπιγγι ϑεοῦ, ‘in the trumpet of 
God;” whereupon the dead will rise. [For this 
use of ἐν, see Jelf. Gr. Gram. 3622, 2. fin.]. The 
word σαλπίζειν is used to denote the trumpet 
blast accompanying the Theophanies,and resound- 
ing over the whole region of their manifestation, 
arousing and shaking all things there (comp. ex. 
xix. 16; Isa. xxvii. 18; Zech. ix. 14), The last 
trumpet refers tothat great Theophany, or Chris- 
tophany, by which all the revelations of God in 
this dispensation will be brought to their close. 
That this will coincide with the seventh trumpet 
(Rey. xi. 15), is, by no means, improbable; be- 
cause, there also John is speaking of the end of 
the world-power, and the coming in of the 
kingdom of God and of Christ—an event with 
which that here mentioned must synchronize. 
From this, however, we are not to conclude that 
Paul had in mind the seven trumpets of the Apo- 
calypse, of which he supposed this to be the last; 
‘«for itis hardly proper to ascribe the peculiarity 
of John’s vision to the apostle Paul, as though 
the doctrine of the latter were moulded by the 
former.” Buraer.—But in no case are we t@ 


CHAP. XV. 51-58. 





suppose any allusion here to the seven trumpets, 
according to which the Rabbis were wont to ex- 
hibit the seven stages of the resurrection—the 
last announcing the instant when the dead were 
to stand upon their feet—since the apostle fur- 
nishes not the remotest hint of the kind. More- 
over, to interpret the trumpet sound of those 
commotions and revolutions which were to intro- 
duce and accompany the judgment; or, as Ol- 
shausen does, of a powerful all-shaking operation 
of the Spirit; or, of an all-agitating κέλευσμα, 
command, or νεῦμα, nod, of God (Theoph.); or in- 
definitely of some sign that the judgment is to be 
held, isarbitrary. The trumpet blast, elsewhere 
spoken of as the signal for battle, (comp. xiv. 7), 
or for assembling, or for judgment, here comes 
as the signal for the great act of the all-victorious 
king, who will call his people out from among 
the quick and the dead into the glory of His 
heavenly life, and so shall gather them about 
himself. But Neander says: ‘‘We shall not be 
abie to take the statement of the trumpet literally 
It denotes the call to the last act of Divine om- 
nipotence.’’—for the trumpet shall sound,— 
σαλπισει is impersonal, it shall sound, like wxex, 
it rains, and the like. It is unnecessary to sup- 
pose any definite subject here, whether God, or 
Christ (comp. ‘‘the trump of God,’ 1 Thes, iv. 
16; and ‘‘the Lord God shall blow the trumpet,”’ 
Zech. ix. 14), or an angel (comp. Rev. viii. 2).— 
The events following upon the sound of the trum- 
pet are introduced by καὶ; first, the resurrec- 
tion of the dead according to 1 Thes. iv. 16, 
“the dead in Christ shall rise first’? (comp. 
above ver. 23), and that, too, in a state of incor- 
ruption (comp. ver. 42).—and the dead shall 
be raised incorruptible ;—‘hen, the change of 
the living, which, as is shown from what follows, 
is also a transition into a state of incorruption. 
{This is in exact accordance with 1 Thes. iv. 15. 
“Those who are alive when Christ comes shall 
not prevent,” ἡ. 6., take the precedence of, ‘‘ them 
which are asleep’’]. But to take the term ‘‘ we” 
as a sort of generalization, by which he did not 
intend literally to denote himself and his cotem- 
poraries, but only those living at the time of the 
Advent, and who belonged to an entirely differ- 
ent period, and so, as equivalent to ‘we Chris- 
tians,’ ὁ. e., those who shall then be alive [as 
Hodge and others], is entirely arbitrary. It is 
unquestionable that the apostle, although op- 
posed to all fanciful expectations and designa- 
tions of time (2 Thes. 11), regarded the second 
Advent as near, and hoped to survive to it; nor 
does what is said in chap. vi. 14, at all conflict 
with this (see above).—The event thus predicted 
is confirmed by a reference to the necessity of this 
change, pointing back to ver. 50.—For this 
corruptible must put on incorruption, 
and this mortal must put on immortality. 
—The epithets ‘‘corruptible” and ‘mortal’ re- 
late to the human body in its present state; but 
they are not to be distinguished, as though the 
former applied to the dead and the latter to the 
living (Bengel); for that which he designates as 
a mystery and has just made known, and that 
whereupon, therefore, the emphasis lies, is, that 
**we shall be changed.” Hence, he is speaking 
mainly of the living. To “put on” (ἐν δύσασ- 
Sac) a figure borrowed from clothing (comp. 


847 


ΞΞΞΞ- 





ver. 49; 2 Cor. νυ. 3, ‘‘not for that we would be 
unclothed, but clothed upon”). The mainte- 
nance of a personal identity, with a change in 
the quality of the vesture, is here unmistakably 
implied; according to de Wette, the figure is one 
of an inward purification (Luke xxvi. 49; Rom. 
xiii. 14; Eph. iv. 24; Col. iii. 10); according to. 
Osiander of adornment and manifestation of the: 
change—both doubtful. The aorist infinitive in-. 
dicates the instantaneousness of the process. 
The repetition of the verb gives emphasis, and. 
preserves the symmetry of the sentence. 

Vers. 54-57. He here announces in a solemn 
manner, enhanced by the literal repetition of: 
what he has just said, that this event will con- 
summate the victory over the last enemy, and in: 
it will be fulfilled the prophecy which predicts: 
the cessation of all death at that time. [*The- 
argument closes in a burst of almost poetical’ 
fervor, (as in the corresponding passage, Rom.. 
viii. 31 ).” SrantEy].—And when this cor-- 
ruptible shall have put on incorruption, 
and this mortal shall have put on immor-. 
tality,—[‘‘a repetition in a triumphant spirit, 
of the description of the glorious change.” AL-- 
FORD ].—then shall come to pass—yevqce- 
ται here expresses the thought elsewhere con- 
veyed by πληροῦσϑαι, τελεῖσθϑαι. --- ἰΒ6- 
saying that is written, — The declaration 
is found in Isa. xxv. 8, in a passage announcing: 
the final consummation of God’s kingdom, and is 
cited, not according to the LXX., but according to 


the original Hebrew, except that Yay pos. 
he will destroy death, is turned into the pas- 
sive ‘‘is swallowed up;’’ and ath) is trans- 


lated as elsewhere in several passages in the LXX., 
6. 5.. Amosi. 11; viii. 8, εἰς νῖκος, into victory; 
while it properly means entirely, altogether (comp. 
Hupfeld on Ps. xiii. 2), which also suits the pas- 
sage in Isa. (others: ‘‘altogether ”’)—Death is 
swallowed up into victory.—kateréd7 
the same idea that is expressed in καταργεῖται 
(ver. 26). ‘‘It 18 ἃ remarkable expression, de-- 
noting the swallowing up of the all-swallower.” 
(Vitringa).—Ei¢vixog can here be interpreted 
neither as equivalent to ‘forever,’ nor yet to) 
‘entirely ;’ nor can we take it as an adverb,. 
‘yvictoriously ’ (Flacius); but it indicates the re- 
sult of being swallowed up —‘ into victory,” 
i. e., 80 that victory is gained, and the enemy is 
overcome. To this the following triumphal song- 
is well appended. An argument may be urged. 
against Osiander’s local interpretation of εἰς, (by 
which victory is personified and represented asa. 
ravenous beast, as though the expression meant 
‘swallowed up in the jaws of victory’), from the: 
want of the article, as also from τὸ νῖκος of: 
ver. 55. Inasmuch as in this whole context. 
death must mean physical death, the doctrine of 
the restoration of all things, as suggested by Ol-- 
shausen, has here no support.—The reference to: 
the prophecy fulfilled at the resurrection culmi-- 
nates in a triumphal song. in uttering which, 
the Apostle seems transported in spirit to the 
moment of that grand consummation. Where, 
—rov, i. 20; Rom. iii. 27.—thy sting,—By 
κέντρον we are not to understand a goad, which 


848 





death may be supposed to use in tilling his field, 
since without sin he could have no power over 
us [Billr. and Scholt.]; nor yet as something 
which calls out the power of death over us, 
awakes its slumbering might to tyrannize over 
us (Olsh.) ; but death is here figured as a veno- 
mous beast, armed with a poisonous, deadly 
sting—a scorpion, for example, [or a serpent 
like a viper in allusion to Gen. iii., and Numb. 
xxi.]—O Death!—In this direct address the 
personification of death comes out more forcibly 
than in ver. 54.— Where thy victory, O 
Death ?—In this clause the Rec. Text has aon, 
Hades, the kingdom of the dead, instead of & a- 
varterepeated. By ““ victory,” in this case, we 
would understand the detention in Hades of 
those who had departed to it; and this would be 
destroyed if Hades were compelled to give up 
the dead in a resurrection. But the reading ady 
is perhaps a correction made in accordance with 
the LXX. version of Hosea xiii. 14. This passage 
undoubtedly floated before the mind of the Apos- 
tle, and apparently in the form in which it ap- 
pears in the LXX. in so far as we translate the 
passage, ‘‘From the power of Sheol will I ransom 
them; from death will I deliver them,” thus: 
“0 death, I will be thy plagues; O Grave, I will 


be thy destruction.” But "ΓΔ [translated 7 
in our version] may be also—JNs, as in Hos. 


xiii. 10, [where it occurs in the sense of ποῦ, 
where,| (comp. Fiirst, Handwérterbuch, 5. v., 


IN, i. 80). But instead of 5 "a7 thy 
plagues (plural of “\)"J=the mille vive leti, 


the thousand ways of death), others appear to 
have read 55"\"}, thy sting, (First, 8. v., 


77); cand pore) may be translated thy 


δὶ ὁ : ii 
overthrow, viz., that which thou workest; in 
which case it is=rd νῖκος cov, thy victory, 
(comp. Schmieder on Hosea xiii. 14). This 
prophecy opens for us a bright view into the 
last glorious epoch, like as Isa. xxv. 8; and the 
thought mounts from the state of not dying, im- 
plied in the loss of death’s sting, to that of resur- 
rection from the dead (Meyer Ed. 3). If we now 
‘unite this passage in Isa. to the citation from 
Hosea, which is not inadmissible, then we have 
-here a combination of texts as in Rom. xi. 8, 
anil eleswhere. [Hodge says the Apostle does 
mot quote Hosea, but expresses an analogous 
‘idea in analogous terms].—To this triumphal 
song there is appended, first, a short explanation 
respecting the sting of death, which serves to 
confirm the statement that death is swallowed up 
(ver. 56). ‘It affords,” says Meyer, ‘‘a firm 
‘doctrinal basis for the certainty of victory over 
death, furnished in the Gospel system.’’—The 
sting of death is sin ;—The parallel here be- 
tween κέντρον and δύναμις might seem to in- 
dicate the propriety of taking the former in the 
sense above given, viz., that of a goad, implying 
that that which set death in motion, and ren- 
dered it active, is sin. But there is no necessity 
for this; and the connection with ver. 55, where 
‘sting’ being parallel with ‘‘ victory,” cannot 
‘denote that by which death is goaded, does not 
‘allow of it. 





The meaning is, rather, that death, 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—.W ΠΤ τ ὦ 


like a scorpion, has ἃ sting, ἃ fatal power im- 
parted to it by means of sin (comp. vi. 23; v. 
12). But in relation to sin he adds—and the 
strength of sin is the law.—This has been un- 
derstood, either of the sin-awakening, and thesin- 
strengthening power of the law in the sense of 
Rom. vii. 7 ff.; or of its condemning power (2 
Cor. iii. 6 ff.; chap. ix.); or both ideas have 
here been combined (Osiander). The first in- 
terpretation is the correct one. As death hasno 
sting, no fatal power, when sin is done away, 
and therefore is destroyed, as death; so sin has 
no power, is become weak and nullified, when 
the law is removed. ‘he law is indeed the re- 
velation of the Divine will in the form of a com- 
mand or prohibition, which both presupposes, and 
calls out the opposition of man against God. So 
long as this stands in authority, sin, and accord- 
ingly death, has power. And here the question 
arises, Does the Apostle intend to infer from the 
nullification of the power of death at that period, 
that then sin and the law are done away? Or 
does he presuppose this as a matter evident of 
itself, and from it draw a conclusion in support 
of the destruction of death, and for the resurrec- 
tion? Or does he mean to indicate that sin and 
the law stand in the way of this consummation ? 
The following verse most readily connects itself 
with the last supposition; since here God is 
praised as the one who, through Jesus Christ, 
ensures a victory over every thing which ob- 
structs the grand consummation; or, more ex- 
actly, the victory over death, of which mention 
has been before made; since in communion with 
Him we are delivered from the law, and, toge- 
ther with this, from the power of sin, and hence 
also from death (Rom. viii. 1). Thus is this 
complete victory exhibited to us in connection 
with the redemption secured by Christ, which is 
nothing less than a deliverance from law and sin; 
and the whole is referred back to God, the Au- 
thor of our redemption, with ascriptions of 
thanksgiving.—But thanks be to God which 
giveth us the victory through our Lord 
Jesus Christ.—The present participle τῷ dc- 
δόντι, he giving us, may be taken as a vivid 
representation of the future in the form of the 
present, showing the absolute certainty of the 
thing; or it may denote the simple fact consi- 
dered by itself apart from all idea of time; or, 
finally, it may represent God to us as the One 
who continually gives us the victory by taking 
away the condemnation of the law, and so des- 
troying the power of sin in a life of faith, which 
is nothing less than a fellowship with Christ, 
who is the end of the law, and the destroyer of 
sin’s power. [‘*This He is: 1. Because He has 
fulfilled the demands of thelaw. It has no power 
to condemn those who are clothed in His right- 
eousness. ‘There is no condemnation to those 
who are in Christ Jesus.” (Rom. viii. 1). Christ, 
by His death, hath ‘destroyed him that had the 
power of death, that is, the devil, and delivered 
them who, through fear of death, were all their 
lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb. ii. 14, 15). 
That is, in virtue of the death of Christ, by which 
the demands of justice are satisfied, Satan, the 
great executioner of divine justice, has no lon- 
ger the right or power to detain. If, therefore, 
it be the law which gives sin its reality and 


CHAP. XV. 51-58. 





843. 





strength, and if sin gives death its sting, He who | fellowship with Him is its objects surely at- 


satisfies the law destroys the strength of sin, and 
consequently the sting of death. It is thus that 
Christ deprives death of all its power to injure 
His people. It is for them disarmed and ren- 
dered as harmless as an infant. 2. But Christ 
not only gives us this victory through His justi- 
fying righteousness, but also by His almighty 
power, He new creates the soul after the image 
of God; and, what is here principally intended, 
He repairs all the evils which death had inflicted. 
He rescues our bodies from the grave, and fash- 
ions them like unto His glorious body, even by 
that ‘‘power whereby He is able to subdue all 
things unto Himself” (Phil. iii. 21). Hoper]. 
Ver. 58. He concludes with an earnest exhorta- 
tion to stedfastness and to advancement in Chris- 
tian activity. And this which he introduces 
with an endearing epithet-—-My beloved 
brethren,—he joins first to a thankful allusion 
to the God who gives us the victory through 
Jesus Christ; and thus the whole exposition 
comes at last to itsclose. This is evident also from 
the corroborative clause. — wherefore—since 
God gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus 
Christ.—be ye stedfast unmovable,—-suffer 
not yourselves to be shaken from the foundation 
-of your faith and hope by any person or thing. 
“«Φδραῖοι, stedfast,—‘ do not turn yourselves from 
the faith of resurrection ;’ ἀμετακίνητοι, unmov- 
able,—‘ be not led away by others.’’’ BenarL.— 
To this still another quality is annexed.—al- 
ways abounding in the work of the 
Lord,—This is not to be taken as subordinat- 
ing what precedes, as Meyer, who interprets: 
‘so that ye distinguish yourselves in furthering 
the work of the Lord by your stedfastness in the 
Christian faith and life;” but it is still another 
feature of good conduct resulting from the convic- 
tion spoken of in ver. 57, viz., excelling in ac- 
tivity for the cause of Christ. By ἔργον τοῦ 
κυρίου we are not to understand, either 
Christ’s work in a preéminent sense, 7. 6., the 
church (as the Romanists); nor yet a divine and 
blessed life (de Wette); but the work which 
Christ Himself undertook in obedience to the 
Father’s commission, and which He has com- 
manded His followers to carry forward. In this 
are comprised both the proclamation and spread 
of the Gospel and the furtherance of the common 
weal by the reformation of individuals and of 
society. ‘It is something in which every Chris- 
tian should codperate through word and work 
in his own sphere.” Burger. To such activity 
he encourages them by a general assurance of 
success.—knowing that your laboris not 
in vain in the Lord.—By κόπος he means 
an activity full of effort, involving burdens and 
self-denials for the advancement of the Re- 
deemer’s kingdom. All this were vain and 
fruitless if our salvation were not to be consum- 
mated in triumph, if no victory over death and 
no resurrection were to be hoped for. But since 
this hope is sure, we know that our efforts will 
not fail of their goal,—that the glorious end will 
be reached at last which will compensate us for 
all our toil. The phrase ‘‘in the Lord’’ belongs, 
not to the subject (Meyer), but to the predicate, 
or rather to the whole clause. The profitable- 
ness of our labor is established in Christ. In 











tained. 

[Obs. 1. In order to appreciate the force of the 
Apostle’s reasoning throughout this whole chap- 
ter, it will be necessary to connect it with that 
general scheme of historical development in 
which his great argument moves. In speak- 
ing of the ‘other world,” or ‘‘the world to 
come,’’ it is common to understand by these ex- 
pressions some mysterious realm existing out- 
side of, or apart from the material world into 
which we are introduced by death, and where 
departed spirits are supposed to be now living. 
Not unfrequently are these terms used inter- 
changeably with ‘‘eternity.” On such an inter- 
pretation, it is not easy to see why the Apostle 
should make a future happy existence so con- 
tingent upon the resurrection ; or, indeed, what 
necessity there is for a new body, if in our disem- 
bodied state we are so completely introduced into 
fellowship with Christ, and the glories of hea- 
ven. Nor can we discover a reason why the re- 
surrection should not take place with every indi- 
vidual immediately after death, according to the 
theory of Bush and the Swedenborgians. To 
keep the soul, that would ‘‘not be unclothed but 
clothed upon,” waiting for centuries before it 
can assume its new vesture, seems almost like 
an arbritrary and needless appointment. But 
the difficulty here presented is all removed 
when we come to reflect that the term translated 
‘‘world” (aiwv) is not a designation of space, 
denoting any particular realm in which people 
live, but of dime. It properly means an age—a 
distinct cycle of years through which certain 
great transactions similar in kind are carried on 
to their consummation, and which is to be followed 
by another of a different kind. Now it isthrough 
a series of these ages, or acons, that Paul con- 
siders the work of the world’s redemption to be 
progressively carried on, all separated by cer- 
tain great crises. The “‘ present age’’is that period 
which dating fromthe Fall is to last until the 
second coming of Christ. At this point the ‘future 
age”’ will begin to date, and this will be the age 
of redemption completed—the age of the Mes- 
siah’s Kingdom and Glory. And the expression 
for ‘eternity’ is generally in the plural—‘ ages’, 
or ‘ages upon ages,’ to signify the ceaseless pro- 
cession of time, under which conception eternity 
was ordinarily represented. 

From this exposition will be seen the impro- 
priety of speaking of souls at death passing at 
once into ‘the other” or ‘‘ future world” or age. 
That future world or age has not yet come in; 
and no one can be said to enter it until Christ 
appears to set up His Kingdom. It is then only 
that the earth will be in readiness for the recep- 
tion of the risen saints. And inasmuch as the 
glory which they are waiting for is to be found 
here, it will be seen why a resurrection is neces- 
sary,—why they want a body at all, and a glori- 
fied body, since it is in this as their organ that 
they will be fitted to dwell in a glorified earth 
and enjoy the felicity of that age. According to 
Paul’s theory, man is not to be separated from 
this lower creation of which he forms a part and 
of which he is the lord. The world was 
viewed by him as one complete whole, termed in 
Rom. viii “the creature” (κτίσις) which as it had 


850 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





been involved in the curse of the Fall was also 
to be restored in its completeness as the theatre of 
the Redeemer's glory. But the time of its resto- 
ration could not occur, until all the redeemed of 
earth were brought in and the number of the 
elect completed. Itis then that the Redeemer 
will appear to set up His Kingdom and around 
Him the whole church will be glorified together, 
none ‘‘ preventing,” 7. e., anticipating the other 
in the fruition of future glory. 

On such a scheme we discover a foundation for 
the Apostle’s argument which identifies a blessed 
immortality, with the fact of a future resurrec- 
tion, and seemingly ignores the possibility of 
an existence in some purely spiritual state, 
such as Pagan philosophy dreams of. The pro- 
cess of redemption underlying this scheme of 
history has been well represented by Fairbairn 
(Hermeneutical Manual, p. 367) under four suc- 
cessive stages and developments indicated by 
four fundamental gospel terms. ‘‘ We see it be- 
ginning in the region of the inner man—in the 
awakening of a sense of guilt and danger, with 
earnest strivings after amendment (μετάνοια, re- 
pentance); then, through the operation of the 
grace of God, it discovers itself in a regenerated 
frame of spirit, the possession of an essentially 
new spiritual condition (παλιγγενεσία, regenera- 
tion) this once found, proceeds by continual ad- 
vances, and fresh efforts to higher and higher 
degrees of spiritual renovation (ἀνακαίνωσις, re- 
newing), while according to the gracious plan and 
wise disposal of God, the internal links itself to 
the external, the renovation of soul paves the 
way for the purification of nature, until, the 
work of grace being finished, and the number of 
the elect completed, the bodies also. of the saints 
shall be transformed, and the whole material 
creation shall become a fit habitation for re- 
deemed and glorified saints (αποκατάστασις, resto- 
ration). 
this regenerative scheme! How unlike the little- 
ness and superficiality of man! How clearly be- 
speaking the profound insight and far-reaching 
wisdom of God! And this not merely in its ulti- 
mate results, but in the method also and order 
of its procedure! In beginning with the inner 
man, and laying the chief stress on a regen- 
erated heart, it takes possession of the fountain 
head of evil, and rectifies that which most of all 
requires the operation of renewing agency. As 
in the moral sphere, the evil had its commence- 
ment, so in the same sphere are the roots 
planted of all the renovation, that is to develop it- 
self in the history of the Kingdom. And the spi- 
ritual work once properly accomplished, all that 
remains to be done shall follow in due time; 
Satan shall be finally cast out; and on the ruins 
of his usurped dominion, the glories of the new 
creation shall shine forth in their eternal lustre.” 

For a list of works on this whole subject of 
the nature and destiny of the soul, the reader 
may consult the appendix to the Wistory of the 
Doctrine of a Future Life, by Alger, where nearly 
five thousand works on this engrossing theme are 
enumerated and described by Ezra Abbot. 
Among the best of the moderns are Deitzscu, 
Psychologie, 2. Ed.; Buexex, Seelenlehre; Hearn, 
on the Zripartite nature of man. Consult also ar- 
ticles in Bib. Sacra, xvii. 803; xiii. p. 159]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


The risen saint’s retrospect and triumph. From 
the heights of a salvation completed the spirit 
looks back, in thought, on the dangers and diffi- 
culties through which it is to pass, and then, in 
contrast, to the deliverance provided for it in its 
several essential particulars; and such a review 
awakens it anew to the praise of God’s grace 
which through the power of Christ removed all 
obstacles, and gave it that victory in which it is 
to obtain the fulfilment of all the divine promises. 
But from this also there springs the earnest de- 
termination to remain stedfast in the mainte- 
nance of the grace conferred, and constantly to 
excel in furthering the great word of salvation 
in the joyful confidence that every sincere effort 
will result in securing at last a perfect commu- 
nion with Christ who in His own person has over- 
come all obstacles and invites His followers to 
share in His victory. 

The attainment of our salvation proceeds 
through three inseparably connected stages— 
the doing away: 1. of the law; 2. of sin; ὃ. of 
death. The law is done away (so far as it calls 
out and intensifies an opposition to God), 
through the revelation of the perfect love of God, 
who sent His only-begotten Son, the holy and 
righteous One, to take upon himself and endure 
the curse of the law, or to become sin and a curse 
for us, and so to redeem us from curse and from 
judgment, and to secure our justification. Thus, 
sin is forgiven; we are accepted in the beloved; 
and a loving child-like communion is established 
which involves a participation in the divine 
glory. Through the manifestation of this love, 
the law is changed from being a summary of 


‘stringent exactions and prohibitions enforced 
What a large and divine-like grasp in | 


by fearful threatenings, into a proclamation of 
the will of a Father now recenciled to us in 
Christ, and who is thus recognized as meaning 
kindness in every requirement, who forbids no- 
thing but what is injurious, enjoins nothing but 
what is necessary and beneficial, obliges us to 
suffer nothing but what is subservient to our 
best good, and disciplines us because He loves 
us.—By this means, also, the power of sin is 
broken, and instead thereof a disposition to love 
awakened, which grows ever stronger and stron- 
ger, masters more and more perfectly all oppos- 
ing tendencies and impulses, and brings the 
whole life with all its organs and powers more 
resolutely and undividedly, more willingly aad 
joyfully, into the service of God’s holy love, and 
thus promotes the sanctification of the whole 
man.—By this same means also death is robbed 
of its sting. For believers who pursue after 
holiness, death appears no longer as an extine~ 
tion of life causing pain and fear, and making 
us dreary and desolate; but as an entrance into 
the rest of Christ, which leads to a glorious re- 
newal of life (comp. Jno. viii. 51; xi. 25 ff. ; 
Rom. vi. 8 ff.; viii. 11, 88 ff.), in which our per- 
fect victory over death, and, together with this, 
the consummation of our redemption, is made 
gloriously manifest. 


CHAP. XV. 51-58. 





HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Starke :—Ver. 51. Hep.: Who then will fear 
the last great day! To become whole at once, 
is this a plague? In an instant mortal will be 
swallowed up of life.—At the resurrection men 
will have indeed new, yet not other bodies; their 
own, only changed.—Ver. 53. What after all is 
beauty of body, and the finest garments; all 
must molder;—the resurrection will, for the 
first time, clothe us in beautiful and lasting ar- 
ray.—Ver. 54f. There are three it is finished: 
1. at the creation, — for then all was very 
good; 2. at the redemption—achieved through 
the blood of Christ; and that was better; 3. at 
our sanctification and the eternal joy and glory 
which follow thereupon; which is the best of 
all. Then our mouth will be full of laughter and 
our tongue full of praise.—Death lies prostrate, 
and has now no more power. Life leaps aloft 
and exclaims: ‘Thus subdued, where, O Death, 
art thou now? and where that sting wherewith 
thou didst give men their deadly wound ?’—Be- 
lievers are now delivered from all dying. Won- 
drous triumph!—Ver. 57. Through His perfect 
obedience and atoning work Christ has rendered 
satisfaction for our sins, and conquered death. 
Of this fact His victorious resurrection is a wit- 
ness. This victory becomes ours through faith, 
and gives us the power to overcome sin and 
death likewise. This will be made manifest 
when Christ has raised our bodies to glory.—No 
one can confidently expect this victory but he 
who can say, ‘my faith also has overcome the 
world both within and without me’ (1 John v. 4 
f.).—What can be more comforting to a Chris- 
tian than that there should be granted him such 
a victory over physical death through Christ— 
that from being the punishment of sin it should 
become to him a blessing, a happy exit from all 
misery, and a joyful entrance into glory, and so, 
a triumph ?—Ver. 58. So long as we do not 
seek to become steadfast in Christianity, to be 
well grounded in faith, upon the Rock Christ, 
and to be immoyeable against all the storms of 
temptation, so long will all labor in the practice 
of Christianity be, for the most part, useless. 
Indeed, not so much as earnest labor, as idleness 
and sleepy existence. 

BERLENB. BipeL:—If we do not put on Jesus 
Christ and the new man from day to day, then the 
corruptible and the new incorruptible humanity 
of the glorified Saviour will not be so speedily 
fused together. He who would share in this 
much wished for change must have his heart 
changed here.—The art of transformation God 
alone understands. What happens now is only 
preparatory. Hence, no one must regard such di- 
vine operations and purifications as a burden.— 
Ver. 54. The victory of Christ will then first be 
fulfilled iz us when the corruptible shall have 
put on incorruption (regeneration in a complete 
sense Matt. xix. 28). This victory has already 
taken place; but it must be fulfilled in all for 
whom it has been achieved separately and actu- 
ally, both in this world and in the next. It will 
be actually begun in each one, when, in his soul, 
sin and its wages, death, have been subdued in 
victory over sin, through Christ’s new resurrec- 





tion power, and, on the other hand, an innocent 
divine life has been begotten in us.—Ver. 55. 
A consolation which is now concealed from our 
eyes, in order that we may walk by faith. Death 
must be disarmed of its means of hurt if we can 
appropriate this language.—Ver. 56. This he 
introduces after his song of triumph in order 
that we may not jubilate after too wild a sort. 
If the sting of death is to be entirely renounced, 
sin itself must be once for all entirely annihi- 
lated.—The power of sin shows itself in the tor- 
ments of conscience and in its urging men against 
their will and better resolutions to do what 
they know to be wrong. This power, especially 
that of accusation and condemnation, which 
every penitent experiences at his conversion is 
given tosin by the law, when it shows to him 
what he has merited from God, inall his thoughts, 
and words, and deeds. And although now such 
ἃ person earnestly resolve to deliver himself 
from sin and begin to guard himself against his 
old habits, and to strive against his evil inclina- 
tions, he will nevertheless not often succeed. 
The law of sin in the members strives against 
the spirit, so that we do not that which we gladly 
would.—Ver. 57. God gives us victory, one 
after the other. If we at any time have already 
overcome any lust, this happened not from any 
power of nature, but of grace which has been 
secured through our Lord Jesus Christ. He 
who has this grace strong in him may boast in 
the Lord and in the power of His might.—What 
boots it, though we daily console ourselves with 
all these sayings respecting Christ’s victory, and 
are yet not daily obedient to him ?—Our enemies 
are not overcome for us in any such way that 
they need not also be overcome in us through the 
power of Christ.—Ver. 58. Firm and immovea- 
ble shall we become, if we earnestly hold to the 
centre.—Striving, watching, praying, the work 
of faith and the labor of love—this is what will 
preserve God to us. Let us only be found dili- 
gent therein.—The work is ours in respect to its 
exercises; it is not ours in respect to its origin. 

Riecer :—Ver. 51 ff. Every divine truth fur- 
nishes its own contribution to faith, partly, in 
preparing the heart for it; partly, in actually 
awakening it ; partly, in promoting its growth; 
partly, in furthering its activity and fruitfulness ; 
and partly, in leading it on to its glorious end.— 
Ver. 54 ff. God’s work cannot remain unfinished. 
The patient waiting of believers, and the sighing 
of*God’s creatures will not remain unheard. 
But for this, we must give God time.—The power 
of* hope brought to light we have to enjoy in the 
extremities of death; but the song of victory : 
O, Death, where is thy sting? will chiefly be 
sung amid the joys of the resurrection. There 
is no encouragement in the scriptures for a 
haughty contempt of death. Even in the New 
Testament, all comfort in reference to it, is de- 
rived from communion with Christ, and from that 
fellowship in love, in which death can effect no 
break nor separation.—Ver. 56. Faith bows 
itself beneath the judgment of God; seizes the 
shield of the hope of salvation; and everywhere 
shows that it has more to do with God, and His 
honor, and the sanctification of His name and 
the fulfilment of His work, and that it is enough 
for us that with all this, God has intimately in- 


852 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


TT at eae -Ξ-ΞΞΞΞΣ Ξε τ Ξ ΗΝ 


woven our salvation also. The sting, by which 
Death can do us the most hurt, is sin, or the 
sentence, that death through sin has come into 
this world, and is now its wages. And the law 
on its awakening in the conscience, first shows 
this enemy in its full strength. Do not, however, 
try to avoid it on this account. He who shrinks 
from entering into the pain and anguish occa- 
sioned by the law, will be deficient in consolation 
and joyful thanksgiving to God. To become 
free from the fear of death at a bound, would 
to many a oneseem right; but the victory given 
us through Christ, has its stages. We are called 
out of sin into grace, die unto the law in its pow- 
er, come into subjection to Christ Jesus and the 
rule of His Spirit, learn thereby how there is no 
condemnation for those who are in Christ, and 
also what is revealed to our hope even for this 
mortal body. Therefore (ver. 58), he who has so 
learned to know sin and grace, death and life, 
and discovers in himself the germ of eternal life 
through the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
can stand fast against all inward fickleness, be 
immovable against external temptations, and 
avoid all weariness, and instead, rather abound 
more and more in the work of the Lord, faith in 
whom is the spring of every thing else. 

Hevupner :—Ver. 54f. The Christian expe- 
riences indeed the natural dread of death, but 
not its inward terrors. Through Christ he be- 
comes stronger than nature. Death has for him 
no more terror, because it brings to him no de- 
struction of being, no judgment, no pain and 
punishment. Such a song of triumph no 
wisdom of this world can strike up. Only the 
fact of redemption tunes us to such peans.—Ver. 
56. That which makes death so fearful is the 
consciousness of sin, and the fear of damnation. 
But sin is terrible on account of the holy law of 
God. This law shows us at once its guilt and 
its curse.—Ver. 57. With this songof praise the 
Christian celebrates the victory over these great 
enemies, Death, Sin and Satan. These enemies 
Christ has already overcome, and celebrated His 
triumph in the unseen world (Col. ii. 15). With- 
out his aid, no one could overcome these mighty 
enemies. This victory is not our merit, but 
@ grace given us by God through Christ. The 
atonement, and the hope of eternal life are 
closely connected. Everything which Christ has 
is ours, and this should be our daily medicine.— 
Ver. 58. The work of our Lord is, a. what 
works in us; 4. what we bring to pass in His 
strength. No pure, humble work is ever in vain. 
The Lord’s work succeeds, and he does not suf- 
fer his followers’ work to fail. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 55. For him whom 
hell no more frights with its torments there is a 
victory over hell also at the last day, when 
Christ will be revealed as the Man who has the 
keys of death and of hell. Whence now have 
we the right, and derive we the courage to sing 
such a song of triumph as we feel welling up 
even in this our mortal body? It stands not in 
our power to avoid the sting of death; but what 
is impossible with us has been made possible by 
God in Christ.—Ver. 58. In order to become 
stedfast through faith in the hope of the Gospel, 
and to stand immovable in the citadel of Aposto- 
lic doctrine we shoul] seek the aid of the Holy 








Ghost. But in the Christian life there is ne 
firm endurance without constant watchfulness. 
If we would abound in the work of the Lord, 
we must allow the work of His great love te 
operate in us, and stand in faithful co-operation 
with that love, in order that every one according 
to his gift and office, may devote himself to the 
edification of the church, with the word of truth 
and with the labor of love (ch. xii. 14). He 
who works in the Lord, and directs his eye to 
the day of harvest says with Paul: “J die 


daily,” and quiets his heart in patience, being 


joyful in hope. 

GrrocK:—Faith’s song of triumph at the 
grave of the risen: “0, Death, where is thy 
sting?” Thy sting whereby thou, a. robbest me 
me of my dearest (ver. 52); ὁ. and threatenest 
my own body (ver. 51); 6. and frightenest my 
poor soul (ver. 56); d. and destroyest the work 
of my hands (ver. 58). 

Luturr :—* Thanks be unto God,” εἰς. This 
may we also sing, and so keep perpetual Easter, 
that we may extol and praise God for such a 
victory, which was not achieved through us, nor 
won in fight (for itis too high and great), but 
has been graciously: given to us of God—whe 
pitieth our sorrows out of which none could 
help us, and sent unto us His son, and let Him 
undertake the conflict. Sin, Death and Hell has 
He overcome, and given unto us the victory, so 
that we may say: ‘It is our victory,’ so that we 
may accept it with earnestness, and not give 
God the lie, neither be found ungrateful for it, 
but maintain it with firm faith in our hearts, 
and strengthen ourselves therein, and always 
sing of this victory in Christ, and go on, joyful 
therein until we see Him also in our own body. 
To this, may God help us through His own dear 
Son, and to Him be all glory and praise forever 
and ever. Amen!” 

[Sermons. — Mannina: — Ver. 51. The Com- 
memoration of the faithful departed. — Newton: 
Ver. 51. The general resurrection. 1. The mys- 
tery. 1. Beyond the reach of fallen man to 
discover without a revelation from God. 2. 
Still unintelligible without a further revelation 
through the influence of the Spirit. II. What 
to be expected—universal changes. III. Sud- 
denness of event—ina moment. IV. The grand 
preceding signal—the trumpet sound. Improve- 
ment. 1. A joyful day to believers. 2. In view 
of it what manner of men ought weto be.—Ver. 
54. Death swallowed up in victory. How predi- 
cable of Christians. I. They were once dead in 
law—but forgiven. II. Once dead in sin—but 
quickened. III. Once under the tyranny of 
Satan—but made conquerors over him. IV. 
Once subject to woes and sufferings—but sorrow 
and sighing are turned to,joy and gladness. V. 
Once reaped the bitter fruits of sin—but grace 
triumphs over every evil.—Vy. 55-57.—Triumph 
over death and the grave.. I. Death armed witha 
powerful sting. 1. What the sting is. 2. How 
sharpened by the law. II. Death disarmed by 


the death of Christ.s IIIT. The doxology—em- ~ 


1. Thanks to God—His 
work. 2. Who giveth us the victory—a victory 
indeed. 8, Through Jesus Christ. This song 
best sung when the whole redeemed are collect- 
ed together.—Howz :—Ver. 54. Zhe Christian’s 


phatic in every word. 


{ 
Ϊ 


{ 


See 


a -..- --.--- ---ς:ς-.-ςςςςς-- α 


CHAP. XVI. 853 





triumph over death. I. The explication of its| apt to perplex the mind from the uncertainty in 
rational import. 1. The import—God’s general | which a future state is invoived. II. From the 
determination to put a perpetual end to death. | apprehensions of wrath proceeding from the 
a. Death as here spoken of supposes a certain] consciousness of sin. III. From the fears that 
limited subject, viz.: such as are Christ’s. 6.} arise in the mind upon the awful transition from 
It extends to the whole of that subject—the | this world to the next. SpurGron :—Vvy. 56-57. 
inner and the outward man. 6. Presupposes a| Thoughis on the last batile. I. The sting of 
war. d. Where this war ends not in victory on| death—Sin. 1. Because it brought death into 
the one side, it ends in victory on the other. 2.|the world. 2. Because it is that which shall 
The reasonableness of the import. a. God's} make death most terrible. 3. If sin in the re- 
glory requires it. ὁ. The felicity of the redeemed | trospect be the sting of death, what must sin in 
requires it. II. The use of the doctrine. 1.|the*prospect be? 11. The strength of sin—the 
If asserted to be believed. 2. Full of comfort; | Law. 1. In this respect that the law being 
a. in reference todeparted friends; ὁ. in refer- | spiritual it is quite impossible for us to be with- 
ence to our own death. III. A monition to us| outsin. 2. It will not abate one tittle of its stern 
since spoken only of some and not of all. IV.|demands. 3. For every transgression it will 
This doctrine should cause us to abstain from | exact a punishment. III. The victory of faith. 
rash censures of providence that God lets death | 1. Christ has taken away the strength of sin in 
reign over so great a part of His creation for so | that He has removed the law. 2. In that, He 
long a time. Joun Logan:—Vv. 55-57, The | has completely satisfied it by His perfect obedi- 
Christian’s victory over death. Christ sets us|ence. 8. By having brought life and immortali- 
free: I. From the doubts and fears that are | ty to light through the resurrection. 


XVII. 


INSTRUCTIONS RESPECTING THE COLLECTIONS FOR THE SAINTS IN JERUSALEM; 


μι θοῦ “1 lr) oe oo 


es | 
bo 


13 
14 
15 


INTIMATIONS OF HIS INTENDED VISIT AND OF THE TREATMENT DUE TO HIS 
FRIENDS AND HELPERS; FINALLY GREETINGS AND PARTING WISHES WITH 
EARNEST EXHORTATIONS. 


} CuartTerR XVI. 


Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to [arranged 
throughout. διέταξα] the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the [every, zara 
μίαν] first day of the week! let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath 
prospered him [whatsoever has gone well with him, 6 re ἂν εὐοδῶται], that there be no 
gatherings when I come. And when I come [am arrived, παραγένωμαι], whomsoever 
ye shall approve by your letters, [om. by your letters] them will I send [with letters] to 
bring your liberality unto Jerusalem. And [But, δὲ] if it be meet that I go [worth 
my going, ἅξιον tod χἀμὲ πορέυεσϑαι] also, they shali go with me. Now I will come 
unto you, when I shall pass through Macedonia: For I do pass through Macedonia. 
And it may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with you [in order, ἔνα], that ye may 
bring me on my journey [send me forward, προπέμφητε, om. on my journey] whither- 
soever I go. For I will not [I do not wish to, οὐ ϑέλω] see you now by the way; but? 
I trust [for I hope, ἐλπίζω γὰρ] to tarry a while with you, if the Lord permit [shall 
have permitted me, ἐπιτρέφῃ] But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost. 
For a great door and effectual is [has been, ἀνέῳγε] opened unto me, and there are 
many adversaries. Now [But, δὲ] if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you 
without fear: for he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do. Let no man there- 
fore despise him: but conduct him forth [send him forward] in peace, [in order, ἵνα] 
that he may come unto me: for I look for him with the brethren. [But] As touch- 
ing our [the] brother Apollos, I greatly* desired him [besought him much, πολλὰ 
παρεχάλεσα] to come unto you with the brethren: but his will was not at all to come at 
this time; but he will come when he shall have convenient time. Watch ye, stand 
fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong. Let all your things [every thing you 
do] be done with charity [in love, ἐν ἀγάπῃ]. [But] I beseech you, brethren, (ye 
know ee house of Stephanas, that it is the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have 


854 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








16 addicted themselves to the ministry [the service] of the saints,) That ye [also, χαῖ] 
submit yourselves [be subject, ὑποτάςςησϑε unto such, and to every oneth at helpeth 
with ws, and laboureth. I am glad of the coming [But I rejoice at the presence, χαίρω 
δὲ ἐπὶ tn παρουσίᾳ] of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was 
lacking on your part [the want of you, τὸ ὑμέτερον" ὑστέρημα] they® have [om. have, 
ἀνεπλήρωσαν supplied. For they have [om. have, ἀνέπαυσαν] refreshed my spirit 
and yours: therefore acknowledge ye them that are such. ‘The churches of Asia salute 
you. Aquila and Priscilla’ [Prisea, Πρίςχα] salute* you much in the Lord, with the 
church [congregation, ἐχχλησίᾳ] that is in their house. All the brethren greet you. 
Greet ye one another with a holy kiss. The salutation of me Paul with my 
own hand. If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ [om. Jesus Christ],® let him 
23 be Anathema, Maranatha. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ? be with you. 
24 My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen [om. Amen]." 


{ The first epistle to the Corinthians was written from Philippi by Stephanas, and Fortunatus, 
and Achaicus, and Timotheus. [om. this whole subscription. |'* 


17 


22 


1 Ver. 2.The Rec. has σαββάτων, but it is feebly attested, and was probably derived from Matth. xxviii.1; Mark 
xvi. 2; Luke xxiv.1. [The singular σαββάτον has been adopted by Griesbach, Lachmann and Tischendorf, on the au- 
thority of A. B.C. Ὁ. BE. F.G. L., Sinait., the Ital. and Vulg. versions, Chrys, and the Latin writers. The plural has the 
support of K. L., many cursives, the Goth. and Copt. versions, ‘theodt. and Damasc.—C. P. W.]. 

2 Ver. 7—For the second yap, the Rec. has δέ, but with inferior evidence in its behalf. 

3 Ver. 7.—The Rec. has ἕπιτρέπῃ, but in opposition to the best MSS., and derived from Heb. vi. 3. [Lachm., Tischendorf 
and Alford favor ἐπιτρέψη after A. B. C. I., Sinait., Vulg. [ permiserit], Chrys., Theophyl.; but the present is given in Ὁ. E. 
F. 6. K. et al., as Alford suggests because “ the force of the aorist was not perceived.”—C. P. W.]. 

[6 Ver. 12.—Before πολλὰ, the words δηλῶ ὑμῖν ὅτε are inserted by Ὁ. E. F. G., Sinait. several Latin MSS., the Vulg. 
Goth. and the Lat. writers.—C. P. W.]. 

5 Ver. 17.—The Rec. has ὑμῶν instead of ὑμετερον, but against much preponderating evidence; comp. Phil. ii. 30. 

For ὑμῶν we have A. K. L., Sinait., a number of cursives, with Chrys., Theodt. and Damasc.; but for ὑμέτερον B. C. Ὁ. E. 
. G., 17, et al.—C. P. W.]. 

6 Ver. 17.—The Rec. has οὗτοι, [with B.C. K. L., Sinait., many cursives, Theodt. and Damasc.] instead of αὐτοὶ [with 
A.D. E. F. G., Vulg. Syr. (Pesch.) Chrys., @cum., Ambrst., Pelag.]; but it is not so well authenticated. 

7 Ver. 19.—The Rec. has πρίσκιλλα and it is well sustained. Even Zachm. in his ed. major has adopted it. [But 
πρίσκα is preferred by Tischendorf, Kling, on the authority of B. M., Sinait., 17, three of the best MSS. of the Vulg., the 
Copt. and Goth. versions, and Pelag. This form appears on the authority of all the uncial and cursives (except o1.e) in 
Rom. xvi. 3; and 2 Tim. iv. 19; and the other (πρίσκιλλα), on unvarying authority in Acts xviii. 2,18, 26. From the Acts 
it appears to have passed into some MSS. of Paul’s Epistles. Zachm. (in the earlier editions), Bloomfield, Alford, Words- 
worth and Stanley prefer the diminutive form, with A. C. Ὁ. ἘΠ, F.G. K. L., εὐ alc. P. W.]. 

8 Ver. 19.—The Rec. has ἀσπάζονται, and Lachmann has adopted it, but it is probably an attempt to correct the text. 
It has in its favor, B. F. G. L., and numerous cursives, versions and fathers; but against it C. Ὁ. B. K., Sinait., and the 

othic and Theodt.—C. P. W.]. 

9 Ver. 22.—The Rec. after κύριον adds Ἰησοῦν χριστόν, but in opposition to the best MSS. ΓΑ, B. C. (1st hand) M. Sinait. 
(Ist hand), 4 cursives, Aeth. (both) Cyr. Chrys. (mosc.). These words are inserted in C. (3d hand), Ὁ. E. F. ἃ. K. L., 
Sinait., (3d hand), Ital. Vulg., later Syr., Copt., and Goth. versions, and some Fathers. Some of these (including K. L., the 
Vulg. Chrys. Theophyl.) insert ἡμῶν before ‘Inc. Xp.—C. P. W.]. 

10 Ver. 23.—The Rec. and Lachmann have Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ, and they are sustained by weighty testimony, [A. C. Ὁ, E. F. 
6. K. L, Sinait. (8d hand), many cursives, 4 Latin MSs. the Vulg. Copt. and Syr. (both), Chrys. Ambrst. Many of these 

including A. L. 20 cursives, the Vulg. Copt. and Syr. and Fathers) insert ἡμῶν after κύριοῦ. Some (including B. Sinait. 
tit hand) 10 cursives, Goth. Theodt.) add only ᾿Ιησοῦ after κυρίου.---Ο, P. W.]. 

1 Ver. 24.—The Rec. has ἀμήν, after important authorities: [A. C. Ὁ. ἘΠ K. L., Sinait., with the majority of cursives, 
versions and writers, Tischendorf (and Dr. Clarke decidedly) cancel it, and it is bracketed by Bloomjield, Alford, Conybeare 
and Stanley). 

(Subscription—The most ancient and best MSS. (A. B. C. Sinait.) have simply IOP] ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ 4; to which F.G. 
prefix ἐτελέσθη; Ὁ adds ἐπληρώθη ; some MSS. of the Vulg. add immediately after d@, explicit. No subscription of any 
kind is found in M. and the Vulgate. The Rec. has πρὸς cop. πρώτη ἐγράφη ἀπὸ φιλίππων διὰ orepava κ. houpTovvatou κ. 
ἀχαϊκοῦ x. τιμοθέον, on the authority of K. L., 7 cursives, Syr. (later), Arab. (later), and Damasc.; two other cursives have 
the same, substituting ἐφεσοῦ for φιλ; and Theodt. the same, omitting ryz. B.(2d hand) and Chrys. (com.) have γράφη 
ἀπὸ ἐφεσῦυ, some others adding τῆς ἀσίας and others substituting this for ἐφεσοῦ. E., a few cursiyes, Slav. Theodt. (spuri- 
ous) cum. have ἐγράφη ἀπὸ φιλίππων, to which Ὁ. (2d hand) and the Syr. (Pesch.) adds Μακεδονίας. The Copt. says: 6 Fi- 
lippa, ut dizerunt quidam ; verum potius videtur secundum tpsitts apostoli indicium scripta esse ex Asia.—C. P. W.]. 


with this agrees the great stress laid in the Gos~ 
pels on the duty of alms-giving. We learn also, 
from the account of the last struggle for inde- 
pendence in Josephus, how deeply the feelings 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
Vers. 1-4. [‘* The conclusion of this Epistle, 


as of that to the Romans, Ephesians, Colossians, 
and 2 Timothy, is taken up with matters more 
or less personal and secular. Of these the first 
is the collection amongst the Gentile churches for 
the poorer Christians in Judea. From whatever 
cause, there was at this period much poverty in 
Palestine, compared with the other eastern 
provinces of the Roman Empire. The chief al- 
lusions contained in the apostolical Epistles, to 
ithe duties of the rich towards the poor, are those 
which we find in connection with the contribution 
‘here mentioned. And in the Epistle of St. James 
and that to the Hebrews, both addressed, if not 
‘to Judea, at least to Jewish communities. And 


of the poor were embi(tered against the rich in 
Jerusalem, so as to give to the intestine factions 
of that time something of the character of a 
social war. This was, in part, occasioned by 
the greater density of population in Palestine, 
compared with the thinly inhabited tracts of 
Greece and Asia Minor; in part by the strongly 
marked distinction of rich and poor, which had 
been handed down to the Jews from the earlier 
periods of their history, where we are familiar 
with it from the denunciations of Isaiah, Jere-~ 
miah and Nehemiah. The Christians, besides, 
were, as a general rule, from the poorer classes 
(Jas. ii. 5), and would be subject to persecutions 





CHAP. XVI. 


855 


OO _—._—OVO 


and difficulties, on account of their religion 
(Heb. x. 24). From the mention of the poor as 
a distinct class in the Christian church, in Acts 
ix. 86, and in the passages relating to the con- 
tribution now in questicn, it would seem that 
the community of property at Jerusalem must 
have either declined or failed of its object; and 
may have eyen contributed to occasion the great 
poverty which we thus find prevailing in the 
period of twenty or thirty years after its first 
mention. So pressing was the necessity at the 
time when St. Paul first parted from the church 
of Jerusalem, that an express stipulation was 
made in behalf of this very point (Gal. ii. 10). 
‘To remember the poor,’ was the one link by 
which the Apostle of the Gentiles was still bound 
to the churches of Judea. This pledge was 
given, probably, before his second journey. 
But it was not till his third and last journey that 
the preparations were made for the great contri- 
bution of which he now speaks. From this pas- 
sage, confirmed indirectly by Gal. ii. 10; vi. 10, 
it would appear that he had first given orders 
for the collection in the churches of Galatia. 
From 2 Cor. viii. 10; ix. 2, it also appears that. 
the orders here given to the Corinthians had 
been received by them a year before the time of 
the Second Epistle, and therefore some months 
before this Epistle.” Sraney]. 

Now concerning the collection for the 


saints,—These words may either be connected | 


with those immediately following, so as to be 
rendered, ‘as I gave order concerning the col- 
lection,’ etc. (comp. xii. 1; viii. 1; 2 Cor. ix. 
1); or be taken absolutely, as in ver. 12, and 
vii. 1. [‘*The περὶ dé, now concerning, rather 
serves to introduce the new subject than to form 
any constructional part of the sentence.” AL- 
ForD. ‘‘Observe the beauty of the connection 
with what has gone before. The Apostle had 
just been preaching consolation to the faithful, 
from the certainty of a glorious resurrection of 
the body; and in accordance with our Lord’s 
declarations concerning works of mercy (Matt. 
xxy. 34-46) he had taken occasion from that 
doctrine to enforce the duty of laboring sted- 
fastly in the Lord in deeds of piety and charity, 
in order to a blessed immortality. He now ap- 
plies that Christian doctrine and duty to a par- 
ticular work, in which he himself was then en- 
gaged, and in which he desired to engage the 
Corinthians.”” WorpswortH]. The entire form 
of the introduction, as well as the article before 
Aoyiac, the collection, indicates that he had spoken 
before in regard to the matter, and the Corin- 
thians had, perhaps, inquired how they were to 
carry it forward. The word λογία no where else 
occurs in Scripture, [‘‘and seems to have been 
Hellenistical and idiotical, it being rarely found 
in the classical writers.” Buoomrretp]. The 
design of the collection is indicated by the pre- 
position εἰς. The saints were the poor Chris- 
tians in Jerusalem (ver. 3; Rom. xv. 26; comp. 
Acts xxiy. 17). The mother church had been 
impoverished in part by the community of goods 
that took place soon after Pentecost, and in part 
by persecutions, and perhaps also ‘by contribu- 
tions for the mission work among the dispersed’ 
(Osiander); and the support of it was an act of 
filial piety, calculated also to promote a brotherly 
union between the Jewish and Gentile Christians. 


The supposition that Paul wished to quiet the 
opposition of the Jewish Christians, who had 
been aroused against him, by this work of love 
(Cath.), is to be rejected as contrary to that 
simplicity of purpose manifest in this Epistle.— 
as I gave order to the churches of Galatia, 
—This order was issued probably during his 
residence among the Galatians (Acts xviii. 23); 
or it may have emanated from him at Ephesus. 
[Nothing of the sort appears in the Epistle to 
the Galatians; the allusion to it there (ii. 10) be- 
ing only incidental]. The mention here of this 
order, thereby indicating what the Galatians 
were doing, was simply for the purpose of stimu- 
lating one church by the example of another. 
As Bengel remarks, ‘To the Corinthians he pro- 





poses the example of the Galatians; to the Ma- 
cedonians, the example of the Corinthians; to 
the Romans that of the Corinthians and Macedo- 
nians (2 Cor. ix. 2; Rom. xv. 26). Great is the 
power of example.”—even so do ye also.— 
ποιήσατε--Τ 8 aorist here imparts urgency to 
the exhortation. The thing is to be done at 
once; ‘‘bis dat, qui cito dat,” who gives quickly, 
gives twice.—Next comes the specific direction as 
to what they were to do.—Upon the first 
(day) of the week—xcard μίαν σαββάτου, 
lit. ‘‘upon one of th: Sabbath.” σάββατον, a 
designation for the week, occurring also in Luke 
xviii. 12. μία, one, is for πρώτη, first; a Hebraism, 





MDD WN (Lightfoot on Matt. xxviii. 1). 
“This passage is important as the first in which 
there occurs a clear trace of a distinction put upon 
the first day of the week, as our Lord’s resurrec- 
tion day. Yet we cannot find here any special ob- 
servance of the day, as Osiander does,’’ NEANDER. 
Inasmuch as he says nothing of laying by in the 
church assembly, it does not follow from what is 
here said, that the churches convened on that day. 
But the passage certainly implies that this day of 
the resurrection of our Lord was for the Caristians 
a holy day, out of which all other observances of 
the sort naturally developed themselves. [Comp. 
Jno. xx. 19, 26; Acts xx. 7; Rev. 1. 10,]—let each 
one of you lay up by himself,—rap’ ἑαυτῷ, Οἱ 
home (comp. πρὸς ἑκυτὸν Luke xxiv. 12) ; [like the 
French chez soi (Ros. Lex. under zava), or the Ger- 
man bei sich selbst (as Luther’s version gives it). 
The phrase is therefore conclusive against the 
prevailing opinion that the collection was taken 
up inthe church. It was an individual and private 
affair. ‘‘This is confirmed by the exhortation in al- 
lusion to the same subject, in 2 Cor. ix. 7, ‘ Every 
man, according as he purposeth in his heart, so 
let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity; 
for God loveth a cheerful giver.’”’* Sranziey]. 
—treasuring up— From the fact that some- 


* [Hodge, however, objects to this, “that the whole ex- 
pression is thus obscure and awkward. ‘Let every one at 
home place, treasuring up what he has to give.’ The words 
mean to lay by himself. ‘The direction is nothing more defi- 
nite than let him place by himself, t. ¢., let him take to him- 
self what he means to give. What he was to do with it, or 
where he was to deposit it, is not said. The word θησαυ- 
pigwv means putting into the treasury, or hoarding up, and is 
perfectly consistent with the assumption that the place of 
deposit was some common, and not every man’s house.” 
This is well argued in behalf of the public solemn obsery- 
ance of the Lord’s day; but we can no more change the 
meaning of παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ than we can the parallel phrases in 
the other languages. They are the idiomatic expressions 
for ‘at home,’ and honestly require that we should so in- 
terpret. This is the rendering which even the ancient 
| Syriac version gives it]. 





356 








»---- - 





thing was laid aside every Sunday, there would 
naturally result an accumulation, ϑησαυρός, hence 
the part. ϑησαυρίζων, [rendered in the E. V. 
‘sin store.”’].—whatever he has been pros- 
pered in,—é, τε av εὐωδῶται; [ὃ, re is for 
kad’ ὃ, or καϑῶς, according as, or, im respect 
to whatever. The addition of ἄν gives it a 
general and potential character; εὐωδεῖσϑαι, lit. 
‘to be set forward on a journey’); hence, ‘what 
he has gained by the success of business.’ This 
he regards as a devine blessing, which he would 
have redound to the benefit of their needy 
brethren [as may be seen from the use of the 
passive implying the reception of some good from 
a source too obvious to require mention]. The 
object of this gradual accumulation was, as he 
says,—in order that there may be no gath- 
erings when I come.—By this preliminary 
work, the whole business of collection would be 
lightened, the voluntariness of the eontribution 
be preserved, a greater amount perhaps collected, 
and timegained. [The order of the Greek would 
indicate an emphasis not observed in the En- 
glish translation, ‘in order that when I come, 
THEN there may be no collections made,’ as 
though he wanted the time of his next visit for 
something more important. The taking up of 
the collection, though a very important part of 
his business, was still only incidental to the far 
greater one of preaching the Gospel. Hodge 
draws another argument from this, in favor of 
the position that this passage is proof of an early 
observance of the Lord’s day for worship. ‘But 
if every man had his money laid by at home, the 
collection would be still to be made. The prob- 
ability is, therefore, Paul intended to direct the 
Corinthians to make a collection every Lord’s 
day for the poor, when they met for worship.” 
There is some force in this. But must not this 
be interpreted in consistency with the settled 
meaning of παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ, and it be supposed to mean, 
as Barnes says, ‘‘that there should be no trouble 
in collecting the small sums; that it should all be 
prepared; and all persons be ready to hand 
over to him what he had laid by?” Or, while 
the ‘‘laying by” was to be at home weekly, may 
not ‘‘the treasuring up”’ refer to the depositing 
of the sum in the church treasury at some time 
previous to Paul’s arrival, so that it should be 
there ready for him. This seems the fairest 
method of interpretation].—And when I have 
arrived— He here goes on to mention some 
further arrangements respecting the guardian- 
ship of the collection, [as it were to pledge in 
advance the utmost care of what might be be- 
stowed, and to preclude any allegations on the 
part of his enemies of any personal interest in 
the matter].— whomsoever ye may ap- 
prove—(oic¢ ἐάν, vi. 18). δοκομάσητε, ‘ap- 
prove after suitable examination.’ [‘* The 
Corinthians themselves were to choose their 
agents, probably to prevent the possibility of 
misappropriation, as others had been chosen for 
a like purpose by the otherchurches. See 2 Cor. 
viii. 18-20, ‘And we have sent with him the 
brother—avoiding this that no manshould blame 
us in this abundance which is administered by 
us.’”? STANLEY]. Thus all suspicion would be 
obviated.—by letters, them will I send— 
δ᾽ ἐπιστολῶν is not to be joined with what 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





precedes [as in E. V. and by Beza, Calvin, and 
Chrys.] (quos Hierosolymitanis per epistolas com- 
mendaverilis), but with what follows. It is pre- 
fixed by way of emphasis; also perhaps in allu- 
sion to the other possible alternative mentioned 
in the next verse, which was already in mind. 
These letters would be for the purpose of ac- 
crediting the messengers, and commending 
them and their object to friends at Jerusalem. 
[‘‘ Hence, we see how common Paul’s practice 
was of writing epistles. And who knows how 
many private letters of his, not addressed to 
churches, have’ been lost? The only letter of 
the kind, which remains to us (except the Pas- 
torai Epistles), viz., that to Philemon, owes its 
preservation perhaps to the mere circumstance 
that it is at the same time addressed fo the church 
in the house of Philemon (ver. 2). Mryver].— 
to convey your favor.—y άριν, used by me- 
tonymy for your ‘charity,’ or ‘token of love.’ 
(Plato: εὐεργεσία ἑκούσιος); likewise in 2 Cor. 
viii. 4, 6, 19. Τὸ this he adds another proposal, 
conditioned upon the magnitude of the collection, 
as making the thing worth while.—But if it 
should be worth my going also,—~. 6., ‘the 
collection, or its gross amount be large enough 
to warrant my taking such a journey in person;’ 
for only this would justify his participating in 
the thing. He says this from a just sense of his 
dignity as an apostle; and it by no means con- 
flicts with a real humility. [‘‘A just estimate 
of one’s self is not pride.” BencreL]. To ascribe 
his readiness to accompany the gift to a desire, 
either to look after its distribution, or to secure 
for himself by means of it a kind reception, is 
altogether gratuitous. He intimates nothing of 
the sort. But it were reasonable to suppose that 
he took this as a delicate way of stimulating 
them to make the collection as large as possible. 
That he actually carried out this purpose, may 
be seen from Rom. xv. 25; comp. Acts xxi. (al- 
though nothing is said here of the collection). 
Vers. 5-9. Taking up his declaration in yer. 
3, about being present with them, he here ex- 
plains himself more fully in regard to his pur- 
pose, especially as to the time of his visit. His 
earlier plan, which he did not carry out (2 Cor. 
i. 23), was, as we see from 2 Cor. i. 15, a very 
different one. [It was to go to Macedonia by 
way of Corinth, and then to return to them at 
Corinth. This he had made known to them 
either by the lost Epistle, or by an oral mes- 
sage. But now he tacitly drops this, (thereby 
exposing himself to a charge of levity of purpose, 
2 Cor. i. 17 ff.), and proceeds to state another, 
reversing the order of his going, fo Corinth round 
by way of Macedonia]. That here announced he 
did execute (comp. 2 Cor. ii. 18; viii. 1; ix. 2, 
4; ii. 1; xii. 14; xiii. 1). [Here we find him 
already in Macedonia, when the 2 Epistle to them 
was written; and in Acts xx. 1 ff. there is an ac- 
count of his journey ].—Now I will come to 
you when I have passed through Mace- 
donia ;—[And this he was to do without stop- 
ping by the way, as may be seen in the next sen- 
tence, which is not to be read, as it often is, pa- 
renthetically, as though repeating in a positive 
manner what had been just mentioned as a con- 
dition of time].—For I shall pass through 
Macedonia.—décép χομαι is here present for 


CHAP. XVI. 


857 





the future ; [and it must be read in its strictest 
sense, g.d., ‘Lam going right through, as] it 
stands in contrast with the παραμενῶ of the 
next clause as indicated by 6é—But with 
you,—[7poc¢ vudc comes first, because designed 
to express the antithesis to Maxedoviav].—it 
may be,—7;vy6v shows his determination was 
not settled. He takes into account circum- 
stances which might possibly prevent his doing 
as he desired.—I shall tarry, or even pass 
the winter,—As his language in speaking of 
his plan breathes an affectionate and winning 
spirit, so he goes on in what follows, where the 
position of the words is expressive of feeling.— 
in order that ye—in preference to every other 
church,—may send me forward whither- 
soever I may go.—In this way he shows how 
very close to his heart they stood. It was a cus- 
tom, as may be learned from many passages, 
(Rom. xv. 24; Acts xv. 3; xvii. 15; 3 Jno. 6), 
for members of the Church to show their respect 
and love by accompanying the ministers that 
went from them, a little way on their journey, 
probably by a deputation chosen from their 
pumber.. ov [with averb of motion], for ὅποι, 
Luke x. 1. [The adverb of rest is joined with a 
verb of motion in a pregnant way, to signify the 
place of rest after the motion is accomplished. 
See Jer. Gr. Gram., 2 647, 6, 3,a. προπέμπειν, 
to send forward, a common expression for denot- 
ing that helpful attendance on departing guests 
which was wont to be done in token of regard]. 
—For Iam not willing at this time to see 
you by the way;—i.e., ‘only make you a 
flying visit. Inasmuch as dpt does not stand 
before οὐ ϑέλω, it is evident he is not here 
speaking of any change of plan in regard to his 
journey, as though his previous wish had been to 
see them only in passing. And since it reads 
ἄρτι and not πάλεν, there is nothing to warrant 
the inference that he made a brief earlier visit. 
The reason of the determination just expressed 
he next gives.—for I hope to tarry a while 
with you,—An expectation which the appear- 
ance of things, as they then were, seemed to 
warrant. πρὸε buac=—rap’ ὑμῖν, as in ver. 6; 
comp. 11, 3.—if the Lord permit.—An expres- 
sion of that pious feeling which always led him 
to realize his dependence on the will of the Lord 
in whatsoever he undertook. [Comp. Jas. iv. 
15. ‘For that ye ought to say, if the Lord will, 
we shall live, and do this, or that ’’—a condition 
which the early Christians were wont to append 
to all expressions of their determination in refer- 
ence to anything future, in the deep conscious- 
ness that all events were under the direction of 
that God to whose will it was their purpose ever 
to submit. With finite creatures no resolution 
can or ought to be absolute. Every act is con- 
ditioned on Him who is the sole absolute Sove- 
reign]. He now states his plans still further.— 
But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pente- 
cost.— [In this revelation of his intentions 
Chrysostom detects an indication of his confi- 
dence and affection toward the Corinthians]. 
There is no reason to infer from Acts xx. 1, 
as Osiander does, that he left Ephesus earlier 
than the time mentioned in consequence of the 
uproar occasioned by Demetrius. Two reasons 
are assigned for his tarrying.—For a door has 











been opened before me,—By the open door 
(comp. 2 Cor. ii. 12; Col. iv. 8; Rev. iii. 8), 
he signifies the opportunity that was given him 
for laboring in the cause of Christ.—large—By 
this he indicates the extent of the opportunity 
before him. It was a wide field,—and effec- 
tual—By this he denotes the intensive aspect 
of it, or perhaps also the influence which his ac- 
tivity seemed destined to exert (Meyer). He 
here passes out from the figure to the real as- 
pects of the case, and that, too, not in a logically 
consistent manner. Hence the reading ἐναργής 
(also in Philem. 6) which appears in the Latin 
authorities, and so the Vulgate has evidens [and 
the Rheims version, evident]. The meaning is, 
that there was a rich opportunity for labor, and 
that, too, of the most abundant and energetic 
sort. And is there not an intimation here also 
of the power of divine grace in opening the door 
(Osiander)? A second reason for lingering at 
Ephesus is,—and there (are) many adversa- 
ries.— The great success of the Apostle pro- 
voked strong opposition against Him. This only 
stimulated the Apostle, who felt himself strong 
in the Lord, to. remain rather than to leave. [Be- 
sides, his presence was the more needful for the 
strength and support of the infant church, which 
he had gathered]. Neander, however, thinks 
that no motive is here assigned for a longer stay, 
but only that the Apostle intended to have the 
Corinthians infer from it that matters were not 
going so very. comfortably with him, and that he 
was obliged to struggle with many obstacles. 
[‘‘ The opponents of the Gospel varied very much 
in character in different places. Those in Ephe- 
sus were principally men interested in the wor- 
ship of Diana. The pressure of the heathen 
seemed to have driven the Jews and Christians 
to make common cause (Acts xix. 22). Whereas, 
in Corinth Paul’s most bitter opposers were ju- 
daizers.”” Hopce]. 

Vers. 10, 11. Now if*Timothy come,— 
Timothy’s visit to Corinth was to precede his 
own (comp. iv. 17). He, together with Erastus, 
had contemplated making a visitorial journey 
first to Macedonia (Acts xix. 22). Him, there- 
fore, he here commends to their friendly and re- 
spectful reception, and to their peaceful further- 
ance of him on his way. Instead of, “if he 
come,” he might have written ‘ when he comes,’ 
thereby simply indicating the time of his arrival; 
but in using the conditional form, he expresses 
some doubt in reference to his coming, in conse- 
quence of the uncertainties of the journey. 
[‘‘And though Paul had sent him forward thith- 
er, yet he had many churches in Macedonia to 
visit by the way.” BLoomrreLp ].—see — βλέπ- 
ew, to look to something, is generally followed by 
ét¢ or πρός; but here by a clause beginning 
with iva, signifying intention.—that he may 
be with you without fear:—This request re- 
fers not to protection from unbelievers, siili less 
is it a warning against hostile attacks from op- 
ponents (Mosheim); but it is aimed rather at 
the haughty, overbearing conduct of proud par- 
tisan leaders, and their followers. He may also 
have had in mind Timothy’s timid nature. This 
request is supported by a reference to the high 
calling of Timothy.—for he worketh the 
work of the Lord,—ipyov τοῦ κυρίου. as 


808 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





in xv. 58; it may mean either the work in which 
the Lord himself is engaged, or that which He 
has prescribed.—as I also do.—By this he ex- 
presses either a similarity of office, or that Ti- 
mothy evinced the same zeal and fidelity to the 
cause of Christ which he also felt (Osiander). 
The first explanation would perhaps be the more 
correct. [Hodge combines them both]. Here- 
upon follows a more definite injunction.—Let 
no man therefore despise him:—whether it 
be on account of his youth (Tim. iv. 12), or on 
account of his natural modesty (Burger, refer- 
ing to 2 Tim. i. 6, 7), or out of party zeal be- 
cause he came from Paul.—but send him on 
—(In regard to the manner of sending on, see 
above, ver. 6].—in peace,—These words are 
not to be connected with what follows (Flatt). 
They do not mean, simply, in safety and in good 
condition, but still more, ‘ without annoyance,’ 
‘with gool understanding and kindly affection.’ 
And the object of this.is,—that he may come 
to me:—Anil the reason for his coming to him, 
and not going elsewhere is,—for I am wait- 
ing for him with the brethren.—These bre- 
thren were not with the waiting Apostle, but 
with Timothy, who must have had other compa- 
nions besides Erastus (comp. ver. 12). It was 
common to send several (Meyer). 

Ver. 12. — As touching our brother 
Apollos,—zepi ’A πο λλ ὦ, stands absolutely 
as ver. 1. Each of the new topics of this 
Epistle being introduced by περί. In reference 
to Apollos see Int. No. 2; and also, i. 12; 
iii. 5ff.; iv. 6ff. That which he said in regard 
to the coming of Timothy prompts him to give 
information now respecting Apollos, because 
perhaps, of a wish that had been expressed in 
regard to him by the Corinthiafjs.—I greatly 
exhorted him to come to you—He here 
wards off in advance all suspicion in regard to 
any reluctance of his own about the visit of 
Apollos at Corinth, and gives them to understand 
his perfect confidence in him, and the brotherly 
relations which they mutually sustained, [not- 
withstanding the party strife that was waged 
under their names at Corinth. So far was he 
from desiring him to stay on this account, that 
he was urgent he should go; it may be in the 
hope that he might contribute something towards 
settling the difficulties. And here we have an- 
other illustration of the nobility of Paul’s spirit, 
his entire freedom fromall petty jealousy and the 
loving confidence which he reposed in his fellow- 
workers]. Apollos must have been at this 
time at Ephesus.—i va denotes not only the pur- 
port, but also the aim of his exhortation to Apollos. 
with the brethren :—These brethren are the 
ones mentioned in ver. 11. [** Besides the mis- 
sion of Timothy there was another later mission 
despatched at the time of his writing this Epistle 
with the view partly of carrying the Epistle and 
enforcing the observance of its contents, partly 
of urging uponthe church the necessity of com- 
pleting their contribution before the Apostle’s ar- 
rival (2 Cor. viii. 6; xii. 18). This mission was 
composed of Titus and two other brethren (2 Cor. 
viii. 18, 22, 23), whose names are not mentioned; 
Titus having been chosen for this, as Timothy 
for the other, probably from his greater energy 
and firmness of character. That the mission 


— 
EEE 


thus described is the one to which he here al- 
ludes can hardly be doubted. The words ‘ ex- 
hort”? and “brother ” are used in the same em- 
phatie and recognized sense in both passages; 
and as the mission there spoken of was previous 
to his writing the second Epistle, it can be re- 
ferred to no occasion so obviously as that which 
is here described. These accordingly are “ the 
brethren”? who would, as he expected, find or 
wait for Timothy at Corinth, and return with 
him. It would seem, however, that the Apostle’s 
original wish had been, that the head of this 
mission should have beennot Titus, but Apollos. 
Apollos, since his visit to Corinth (Acts xviii. 
27, comp. with 1 Cor. iii. 6) must have returned 
to Ephesus; and he, both from the distinetion 
which he enjoyed in the opinion of his fellow 
Christians, and from his previous acquaintance 
with the church at Corinth, would have been a 
natural person to send on such a mission. It is 
a slight confirmation of the identity of this mis- 
sion with that of Titus, that the only later oc- 
casion on which the name of Apollos occurs in 
the New Testament is in the Epistle to Titus, iii. 
13, where they are spoken.of as living together.” 
Sraniey].—-but (his) will was not at all to 
come at this time ;— Some here take the word 
‘¢ will,” which stands without further designa- 
tion, to mean ‘the will of God,’ appealing for 
support to the inconvenience mentioned in the 
next clause, and to the analogy of Rom. xii. 28; 
but the context clearly shows the will of Apollos 
to have been meant. Here, too, iva is not to be 
taken in the strict telic sense, but it simply 
indicates a degree of determination in the resolve 
taken. The reason of the unwillingness of 
Apollos to goto Corinth may have lain, partly, 
in his fear of encouraging the factions at Co- 
rinth, and, partly, in other duties which he re- 
σιν ρα as more pressing. The latter seems to be 
indicated in the next clause.—but he will 
come when he shall have convenient 
time.-—evxacpeiv, a word of later Greek, meaning 
to have opportunity, leisure, or occasion, for any- 
thing. Here, it refers, not to the removal of 
difficulties at Corinth, as though it meant, ‘ when 
you have become united again’—but to other 
circumstances and engagements which werethen 
holding him back, 

Vers. 13-14.—Watch ye, stand fast in the 
faith, act like men, be strong.—Hastening 
now to the close, he aims to impress upon his 
readers briefly and earnestly the duty of devoting 
themselves to the service of the Lord—whether 
he or Apollos were present to observe them, or 
not. This exhortation—called out; as Burger 
thinks, by the mention of Apollos, whose name 
might serve to awaken the recollection of mat- 
ters already rebuked (i.—iii.)—revolves around 
two main points, faith and love. Stedfastness in 
the faith essentially presupposes watchfulness— 
that Christian cireumspection which keepson the 
look-out for all attacks of treacherous foes, both 
from without and from within, abandons itself 
to no false security, and fortifies itself against 
temptation from whatsoever source (comp. x. 12). 
And this watchfulness is even associated with ἃ 
wakeful, courageous, manly attitude, and with ἃ 
summoning up of strength to resist the might of 
every foe. These two qualities are no less an 


CHAP. XVI. 


859 


aaa 


evidence of faith, than they are the conditions of a 
true steadfastness. The expressions used, all 
imply the figure of a spiritual combat in which 
they are supposed to be engaged. The ‘“stand- 
ing” (στήκειν) here does not denote a standing 
in readiness for the fight, but a standing firm in 
it, and not suffering one’s self to be forced aside 
from that faith which is the basis of the Christian 
life—the fixed attitude of the warrior in the 
ranks or at his post (comp. xv. 1, 58).—avdpifec- 
Ya, to be manly, in deportment and action, occurs 
only here in the New Testament; elsewhere in 
the Classics and LXX. Josh. i. 61; 1 Mace. ii. 
θ04.--κραταιοῦσϑε, be strong (comp. Eph. iii. 
16. ‘Be strong in might through his spirit in 
the inward man’’); in the older Greek, the 
word for this was κρατύνεσϑαι. The word is 
suggestive of conflicts with open enemies, such as 
Jews and Heathen and also, of persecutions en- 
dured on account of the faith (Osiander).—Let 
all your things be donein love, After what 
he has said already, on the duty of love he needed 
only to express himself briefly on this point in 
concluding. The allusion is primarily to their 
divisions and strifes, g. d., ‘in all you do, instead 
of being governed by a selfish partisanship, suf- 
fer yourselves to heactuated by a love which looks 
to the wellbeing of the brotherhood’ (comp. xiii. 
Thy xt. 18 vit. Fs x. 24, 33).  [** He says, 
‘watch ye,’ as though they were sleeping ; ‘stand 
fast,’ as though they were wavering; ‘be manly 
and strong,’ as though they were effeminate and 
delicate; ‘Jet all your things be done in love,’ 
as though they were at strife.” Curys. ] 

Vers. 15-18. After the above concluding ex- 
hortation he turns to speak of some personal 
matters. And first he enjoins a respectful be- 
havior towards certain prominent members of 
the church and one in particular.—And I be- 
seech you, brethren,—The particular point 
of his exhortation is introduced by tvain the 
16th verse; and what follows must be treated as 
a parenthesis, referring to what was already 
known by them and formed the motive for their 
complying with his request—ye know,—oi- 
date; thiscannot bea part of his exhortation, 
for the simple reason that it cannot be shown to 
be the imperative form for icve.—the house of 
Stephanas that it is the first fruits of 
Achaia,—. e., the first in that province who 
were brought to the faith (comp. Rom. xvi. 5, 
where the words ‘‘unto Christ’ are added). 
From i. 16 we learn that Paul himself baptized 
this family. It was the first sheaf of a great 
spiritual harvest in Corinth, indeed in that 
whole region; hence a family most readily dis- 
posed toward the Gospel, and from which no 
doubt a saving influence emanated. As it dis- 
tinguished itself in respect to faith, so also in 
respect to love.—and that they have ad- 
dicted themselves to the ministry of the 
saints.—The plural here occurs, because the 
term ‘‘house”’ is a collective noun. By ‘‘minis- 
try’”” we are not to understand any official ac- 
tion such as is carried on in the capacity of a 
presbyter, for which indeed such first fruits 
were as a general thing preéminently fitted. 
There is nothing in the following verb “submit 
yourselves”’ to constrain us to this supposition, as 
though the meaning here were that the Corin- 











thians should subject themselves to these per: 
sons just as other churches submit themselves té 
their rulers; rather the injunction here—That 
ye submit yourselves unto such—corre- 
sponds to what has just been said of the house 

hold of Stephanas: ‘as these had addicted 
themselves unto the ministry for the saints—a 
thing which inyolved a sort of submission so 
also do ye devote yourselves to them.’ In what 
way this ministry had been exercised is uncer- 
tain; probably in services of love to individuals 
ΒΟ ἢ as the poor, the sick, in hospitality towards 
brethren visiting from abroad, and in the under- 
taking of various responsibilities in behalf of the 
church, as for example, the journey of Stephe- 
nas to Ephesus for the purpose of seeing Paul. 
The word ὑποτάσσεσϑαι denotes not simply 
the showing of respect in general but like obsequi, 
following a person’s advice or opinion, conduct- 
ing in accordance with their wishes. [“Νο- 
thing is more natural than submission to the 
good.” Hoper]. By the expression τοῖς, rT ou- 
ovrocg he brings to view more prominently the 
excellent qualities of the parties referred to, q. 
d., ‘to persons of like excellence with these.’ 
That it does not refer to a class is evident ‘rom 
the clause appended,—and to every one that 
helpeth with us and laboreth.—lIt is de- 
bated to what the συν, with, in συνεργοῦντι 
is to be referred. There is nothing in the con- 
text to justify our referring it to God. Rather 
we are led to refer it to the apostle, and, next, 
to those just mentioned. The participle kom c- 
ὥντι implies that this codperation was an ear- 
nest and laborious one. [‘‘Those who serve 
should be served.” Hopncr]. He enforces his 
injunction in relation to the family of Stephanag 
by mentioning what he and the Corinthian 
brethren with him, Fortunatus and Achaicus, 
had done for himself, thereby enchancing their 
respect for these worthy men.—I am glad of 
the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus 
and Achaicus:—These men had been sent as 
a deputation to him from Corinth, and had 
brought the letter alluded toin vii. 1. In regard 
to them we can determine nothing more defi- 
nitely. Whether it was the same Stephanas of 
whose family he had just spoken (as is probable), 
or a son of his; and whether the two others be- 
longed to this family or not; and whether this 
Fortunatus was the same as the one mentioned 
in the first Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians 
or another of the same name, is all uncertain. 
The reason of his joy at their presence was,— 
because your want they have supplied.— 
For a like expression see Phil. ii. 30. But what 
are we to understand by the expression τὸ ὑμέτ- 
epov ὑστέρημα, your want? It would be 
inconsistent with the whole spirit of this para- 
graph to suppose the Apostle to imply a bitter 
charge against them by translating the words, 
[as in the Ε΄. V.] ‘‘that which was lacking on 
your part,” as though they had failed in suit- 
able tokens of love, or the like. It is better to 
take ὑ μέτερον as the objective genitive (comp. 
xy. 31), and translate ‘the want of you,’ ἢ. ¢., 
your absence. This it is which was in part 
made up by the presence of these brethren. 
This is more fully explained in what follows— 
For they have refreshed my spirit and 


860 





yours :---ἀναπαύειν, lit. to cause to rest, to relieve 
from care or trouble, and in general, to refresh (2 
Cor. vii. 18; Matt xi. 28; Philem. vii. 20). But 
how far did they refresh Ais spirit, and that of 
the Corinthians? The latter certainly, does not 
refer to any earlier services of love which these 
men had shown to the Corinthians; and just as 
little, to the assurances of love from the apostle 
which they carried back with them; since this 
was not contemporancous with their refreshment 
of his spirit: hence, also, not to the influence 
which the information and assurances they had 
conveyed to him had had upon the shaping of 
this Epistle. The point is best explained upon 
the ground of a fellowship between the apostle 
and the church (comp. 2 Cor. 11, 3), φ. d., ‘ while 
they refreshed me, they also refreshed you.’ 
The quieting of his spirit by the information 
they had brought and by their personal presence 
wh ch served to exhibit anew the love of the 
church toward him and awaken in him the hope 
of their improvement, must also have been bene- 
ficial for them; and the consciousness of a fel- 
lowship thereby renewed and strengthened must 
have proved exceedingly refreshing alike for 
theia and for him (comp. Osiander and Meyer 
ed. 3, who remarks, ‘‘that their interview with 
the Apostle must have been refreshing to the 
feelings of the whole church, inasmuch as they 
had come to him as representatives of the whole 
church.” As they through their presence had 
provided for Paul a sweet refreshment they had 
also done it for the church, which, by their 
means. had comeinto communion with him and 
was indebted to them for this refreshment, which 
must have been felt by it in the consciousness of 
this communion. [‘*However understood it is 
one of the examples of urbanity with which this 
Apostle’s writings abound.” Hopagr]. To this he 
alds the exhortation—therefore acknow- 
ledge ye them that are such.—émyivdioxew 
does not mean precisely to highly value, but to 
rightly recognize, viz.: in their true worth and 
according to their deserts, from which indeed es- 
teem naturally follows. The reason for this is the 
thing of which he has just spoken—their services 
and the refreshment which had been administered 
by them both to himself and the church. 

Vers. 19, 20. He presents a three-fold greet- 
ing whereby Christian fellowship is expressed 
and confirmed.—The churches of Asia sa- 
lute you.—Asia is here to be understood, 
either in the narrowest sense as designating 
Ionia and the region round about Ephesus; or 
suitably to Roman usage then current, as ap- 
plying to the whole region of Asia Minor border- 
ing on the western coast, including Caria, Lydia, 
Mysia (Asia proconsularis). Since a regular in- 
tercourse was maintained between Ephesus and 
those regions, and since the apostle stood in 
living relations to the churches here planted, 
both by personal visits and by means of breth- 
ren visiting him from thence, it is probable that 
they sent greetings by him to the Corinthian 
church on his giving them information respect- 
ing it and announcing his intention of writing. 
Next comes a greeting from that excellent Chris- 
tian couple who formerly tarried with him at 
Corinth, and were intimately connected with the 
Christian church there, but who had left and 








THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





come to Ephesus (Acts xviii. 2, 26). The greet 
ing here is a hearty one, and founded upona 
Christian fellowship.—Aquilla and Priscilla 
salute you much in the Lord,—As bound 
together by faith in a common Lord, they here 
send the benedictions of a fervent love.—and the 
Church that is in their house,—~. 6., not sim. 
ply their numerous household, but that portion 
of the Ephesian church which was wont to as- 
semble under their roof. Owing to the lack of 
accommodations, the larger churches, like those 
of Ephesus and Rome were obliged to divide, and 
meet in several rooms furnished by the more 
wealthy members.—All the brethren greet 
you.—. e., the Ephesian Christians collectively, 
apart from those just mentioned specifically. 
The fellowship thus extended from church to 
church, he next insists on their maintaining 
among themselves.—Greet ye one another | 
with an holy kiss.—[‘‘ This was the conyen- 
tional token of Christian affection. In the 
East the kiss was a sign either of friendship 
among equals, or of reverence and submission 
on the part of aninferior. The people kissed 
the images of their gods and the hands of 
princes.”” Hopcr]. This token the apostle 
would have them give to each other immedi- 
ately upon their hearing the Epistle, as a pledge 
of their freshly awakened brotherly love, and 
in connection with the assurances of love con- 
veyed to them in the salutations from abroad.— 
ἀσπάζεσϑαι, to manifest a cordial love, especially 
at times of meeting and parting. ‘A holy kiss” 
means the token of Christian fellowship and 
holy love, as contrasted with that prompted by 
natural or impure affections. The expression 
occurs also in Rom. xvi. 16; 2 Cor. xiii. 12; 1 
Pet. v. 14. In the century following Christians 
were wont to welcome each other after prayers 
and at the love feasts and before the communion 
of the Lord’s Supper, men greeting men, and 
women women, as brethren and sisters. ‘‘The 
kiss which they were to give,” as Bengel ob- 
serves, ‘‘was one in which all discord and dis- 
sention must be swallowed up.” 

Vers. 21-24. The salutation of (me) 
Paul with mine own hand.—As Paul com- 
monly wrote by an amanuensis, he was accus- 
tomed to write with his own hand the conclud- 
ing sentences of his Epistle by way of authenti- 
cating them (2 Thess. iii. 17; Col. iv. 18), 
Accordingly he here appends his own greeting 
with his own hand in token of the genuineness 
of the Epistle. ‘Zhe salutation,” as it were 
the main one—the greeting par eminence. Next 
follows, in the first place, an earnest word of 
warning, written still undoubtedly with his own 
hand.—If any man love not the Lord 
Jesus Christ,—He here excludes all formal 
Christians from any part in his salutation and 
blessing. Since his language does not apply to 
those who are not Christians professedly, and 
nothing can be said about positive hatred to the 
Lord among Christians, the expression ‘love 
not” cannot be interpreted as equivalent to 
hate; but it is to be understood of decayed af- 
fection, which betrayed itself in party strife, as 
well as in fostering other carnal tendencies; 
and in doubting or denying different portions 
of Christian truth. ‘* Wherefore does the Apostle 


CHAP. XVI. 


861 





speak thus here? Because in his view love to 
Christ is the very soul of the entire Christian 
life; and the Corinthians needed to be specially 
reminded of this love; for their divisions ori- 
ginated in the fact that the love of Christ did 
not sufficiently unite them.” NEANDER. φιλεῖν 
means to love with a peculiar intensity of affec- 
tion, and the word is used by Paul only in this 
place in relation to Christ. (John designates by 
it, chap. v. 20, the love of the Father to the Son, 
and also the believer’s love to Jesus, xvi. 27; 
xxi. 15,17). In Eph. vi. 24, Paul employs the 
word ἀγαπᾶν, which is the term common with 
him to denote the love of God and Christ, and 
also our love to God, and to the brethren, and 
to wives. While the latter word which properly 
means to highly esteem, is never used to express 
a sensuous, passionate affection, φιλεῖν is found 
in this sense, yet rarely however. It here means 
to value highly, to regard in the light of a dear 
friend, a token of which regard was a kiss, 
φίλημα, which probably suggested the use of 
φιλεῖν. Short and sharp is the denunciation 
pronounced.—let him be Anathema,— Not 
simply, ‘let him be expelled from the church, 
but let him be devoted to God’s wrath and judg- 
ment,’—let him become a curse, accursed. The 


word ἀνάϑεμα correspond to the Hebrew 99, 


a ban, 7. e., one put under the ban—irrevocably 
devoted to destruction—to be given up to God 
without power of redemption, which, if the thing 
were animated, involved a putting to death 
(comp, xii. 3; Gal. i. 8, and Meyer on Rom. ix. 8). 
This imprecation or malediction is confirmed by 
an allusion to the judgment which will introduce 
it. — Maranatha. — Syriac for ‘our Lord 


comes (NIN NIVWD); ‘not, ‘he has come,’ 


so that obstinate hatred and conflict with him 
are all useless’ (Jerome). Why Paul here em- 
ploys the Syriac can only be conjectured. It 
can hardly be said that it was for a stronger 
confirmation of the genuineness of his Epistle 
by the use of Hebrew letters; such extraordi- 
nary confirmation when his Epistle was to be in 
charge of trusted friends, is wholly superfluous. 
Or was it because this formula was one current 
among the Jews as expressing their strongest 
ban? Meyer says, ‘‘perhaps it conveyed an 
important reminiscence to his readers from the 
period of his residence at Corinth; or it was 
only the thought of the moment to give a more 
solemn character to his declaration.” Bisping 
says: ‘perhaps Maranatha was the mysterious 
password of the early Christians (comp. Rev. 
xx. 22).” For other improbable conjectures see 
Meyer and Osiander. Luther’s Maharam Motha, 
meaning maledictus ad mortem, is a groundless 
alteration, Heubner says: ‘that Luther ap- 
pended this as the Hebrew formula for excom- 
munication.” [By translating the expression 
into Greek, ὁ κύριος ἔρχεται, we are at once re- 
minded of the epithet 6 épyopévoc, the coming One, 
as applied to the Messiah in Matth. xi. 3; Luke 
xvii. 19, 20; John vi. 14; xi. 27; and also as 
constantly recurring in Revelation, where the 
coming of Christ forms the refrain of the whole 
book, and where at the close John winds up the 
canon of Scripture with a reference to the solemn 


eee ee ι΄ ο΄ ΄΄΄“΄ΠἽἝὯ΄΄'΄΄΄΄΄͵͵.ῬΉβα»͵ἘἘς-ς--΄“΄πτἈ ιἨ τπὯττὺἷ΄΄Ἵ“Ῥρ΄΄΄΄΄ππ: ΄᾽΄ὺἷἝ.΄-ο-΄- .-τ’--ς-͵-:ο---ς- ͵, , χσ;α-- 


fact, ‘‘He that testifieth of these things, saith, 
Behold I come quickly. Amen. Come, Lord 
Jesus.” Here in fact is the key-note of the 
Apostle’s constant mood. In all the changes of 
thought and feeling we hear it ever returning; 
and what is more natural than that in uttering ~ 
it, he should use the very terms in which the 
thought was always ringing through his soul? 
They had acquired with him the character of a 
solemn formula, for which nothing else could be 
substituted]. After this severe exclusion of the 
unworthy there follows a benediction.—The 
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ (be) with 
you.—As to be anathema from Christ is ever- 
lasting perdition so His favor is eternal life. 
The prayer here is therefore a prayer for all 
good. To this he adds assurance of his own 
love as felt toward all in Christ Jesus.x—My 
love be with you all in Christ Jesus.— 
As in the previous clause εἴη is to be supplied, 
so here we must insert ἐστέν, is, as a positive de- 
claration of what he actually cherished toward 
them. Mew?’ ὑμῶν, with you, a designation of 
communion with them, or of the presence of his 
spirit in the midst of them, g.d., ‘is among you 
all’—a harmonizing, reconciling expression used 
in view of his strong rebukes and of their par- 
tisan distrust. ‘‘The expression forms a strik- 
ing.contrast to the strifes and divisions among 
the Corinthians which the Apostle here is re- 
solved to ignore.”” NranpEerR. [The closing 
word in the Rec., ‘‘Amen,’’ was an after-addi- 
tion. It being originally a word of response, 
the Apostle could not well have appended it to 
his own production. The adoption of it falls in 
with the current inconsistent usage of closing 
one’s own prayer with an Amen—a thing which 
ought to be left to the congregation at large. 
But though the word forms no part of the Epis- 
tle, it still fitly comes in at the end to express 
the cordial, emphatic assent which every Chris- 
tian heart must feel constrained to utter as he 
finishes an epistle so replete with Divine Wisdom 
and Love issuing from one of the noblest spirits 
that ever wrought on earth in the cause of Heaven, 
with whom it has been good to hold communion. 
Yes, let the Amen stand the abiding testimony of 
the faith of the Church in the teachings of the 
greatest of the apostles; and the whole world 
come at last to say as they read verse after verse, 
chapter after chapter, epistle after epistle, in ac- 
cent strong and clear, AMEN]. 

The subscription is later. The statement of 
the letter being sent from Philippi arose from 
a misunderstanding of what is said in ver. 6 
about his passing through Macedonia. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. [Christian Beneficence. 1. Its source. It fol- 
lows as the natural exercise of that divine love 
which is shed abroad in the heart by the Spirit, 
and which likens us to that Redeemer who freely 
gave Himself np for us all, and demands of us 
that we give as freely as we have received. 2. 
Its scope. It goes beyond—yea, ignores—all 
natural limitations of family, or neighborhood, 
or country, or nationality, and is governed sim- 
ply by the providential calls made on it and by the 
opportunities opened to it. Christianity breaks . 


862 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





down all barriers, obliterates all distinctions be- 
tween Jew and Gentile, and brings the whole 
race into a-sympathy that makes us regardful of 
the welfare of our fellow-men wherever found. 
In the text we have the first instance of this 
broad charity ever known—Gentile Christians 
in Greece, contributing to supply the destitution 
of Jewish Christians at Jerusalem. It was the 
commencement of a work of charity which is 
destined to spread with the church, and will go 
on increasing in vigor and intensity, just in pro- 

rtion as the Spirit of Christ prevails in the 
a of believers. 3. It should be systematic, 
forming a part of the Christian’s duty as regu- 
larly as his prayers and worship. Inasmuch as 
the demands for it are constant, and the disci- 
pline of it is ever needful to the character as a 
counteractive to our natural selfishness and for 
the development of charity, it is only by habitual 
practice that the ends contemplated in it can be 
properly answered. The time prescribed for it 
by the apostle is the first day of the week—the 
day cc.amemorative of our Lord’s resurrection 
and victory, and the day of the church’s joy, 
and gladness, and praise. And surely no time 
can be more fitting for the exercise of our grate- 
ful charity than this; for it serves.to remind us 
in an especial manner of Grod’s redeeming grace, 
and, so, of the love which we ourselves, have 
experienced. In fact, alms-giving ought to be 
made a part of our Sabbath worship, com- 
ing in there as a tribute, not so much of kind- 
ness towards the needy and the destitute, as of 
thanksgiving and honor unto the God of our 
salvation. [t thus becomes a matter not of im- 
pulse, performed under the influence of emotions 
excited by special appeals, but of principle, rest- 
ing upon established grounds, and furnishing a 
reliable foundation on which to carry forward 
the great work of the church. 4. Its m2asure. 
«¢ According as God hath prospered’’—so writes 
the apostle, prescribing no fixed proportion as 
under the ancient dispensation, but leaving it 
with every man to determine with himself what 
the amount shall be. The rightuse of the liber- 
ty of judgment here granted is a part of the 
Christian’s probation; and the manner in which 
he improves it will serve to show his sense of 
obligation to the God that has prospered him, 
and the strength of his love. The beauty and 
the worth of Christian charity are seen in its 
voluntariness, and also, in its freedom from all 
parade. Hence, the requisition of the apostle 
‘«let each one lay up by himself,” in the privacy 
of his own home, settling the matter with quiet 
reflection amid the abundance of those blessings 
which constitute the sum of his domestic happi- 
ness. Itis there that he can best ascertain how 
much he owes to his Lord]. 

2. Conditions of success in Christian life. If the 
Christian life is to be successful it must, on one 
hand, abide immovably fixed on the foundations 
of faith, ever keeping in view the temptations to 
which it is exposed, not allowing itself to be 
turned aside from known truth, and resisting 
every assault with manly courage and mighty re- 
sistance. On the other hand, it must give love the 
sway inevery particular, so that the same person 
who, in one case, shows himself a courageous 
hero in the fight of faith and powerful to pros- 


trate every foe, shall in others, prove himself a 
willing servant and subject himself to the wishes 
of others—being a lion in conflict, and a lamb in 
tenderness and patience, the image of him who 
is at the same time the Lion and the Lamb (Rey. 
v. 5, 6). 

3. Mutual concurrence in the Church. In ἃ 
true churchly life it so happens that the more we 
exercise our love in serving others, the more will 
those who are thus served be disposed to submit 
tous. Such love makes the recipients of it, not 
haughty, but lowly in spirit. The fact that 
others do for them, constrains them, and inspires 
them with zeal to requite the service shown, and 
to respond to the slightest wishes of their bene- 
factors. Counsel and exhortation coming from 
such a source, even though it be in the form of a 
request, appear to them as sacred commands. 
In such rivalry of humility lies the wonderful 

| harmony of the Christian church life. 

4. The fervor of a truezeal. The more ardent 
our lovefor the Lord, and the more profound our 
regard for souls, the more fervidly will our zeal 
burn for Him, that He should be loved by all 
as He deserves—that no soul shall be wanting in 
affection for him, and that none suffer his love 
for Him to grow cold. And however severe may 
-be our zeal in its indignation against those in 
whom love dies out by reason of the prevalence 
of sinful affections, prompting us to rebuke 
them with words of burning condemnation, yet 
all this will be nothing less than a sincere, ar- 
dent love for the souls themselves, which urges 
a person on to ascertain whether he cannot in 
some way bring them back to reflection, so that 
the flame which has died out may be kindled 
afresh and made to burn with new brightness on 
the altar of the heart. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Starke:—Ver. 1. ‘Pious and poor often g¢ 
together.’—-We ought indeed to enlist ourselves 
in behalf of all that suffer, without always in. 
' quiring whether they are worthy; but worthy 
ones, such as true members of Christ, ought tq 
be regarded in preference to others, especially a4 
the dear Saviour has given us so precious a prov 
mise in reference to them (Matt. xxv. 35). Why 
would deny his Saviour such a service of love ?— 
One church ought readily to follow another is 
good and praise-worthy conduct (1 Thess. ii. 14), 
—Ver. 2. There isnone so poor but he may find 
some one poorer, towards whom he can show the 
works of love and compassion (Mark. xii. 42; 1 
Kings xvii. 10 ff.), and thus cultivate the grace of © 
charity. Hep.: — Ver. 8. Paul cares, writes 
and entreats for the poor; and should it be a dis- 
grace to imitate Him?—Ver. 4. We should 
grudge no labor bestowed for refreshing the pioug 
poor, since we do it to Christ.—Ver. 5. Although 
the servants of the church have at this day no 
command to go about the world as the Apostle 
did, it is nevertheless necessary that the state of 
the churches should be investigated at times by 
those who are appointed for the purpose, in 
order to improve what may be improved (2. 
Chron. xvii. 7 ff).—Ver. 6. The church should 
care for its true servants that they come not inte 
peril of their life, since one such is a great trea- 





CHAP. XVI. 


v 





sure.—Ver. 7. We should subject our plans and 
purposes to the will of God, and either carry them 
out or abandon them according to His pleasure 
(Jer. x. 23; Jas. iv. 15). When in populous re- 
gions the whole counsel of God is powerfully 
proclaimed by earnest preachers, and such pro- 
clamation is enforced by their own holy walk, 
and God opens to them a door for the conversion 
of many souls, Satan commonly stirs himself 
up against them in his instruments. But by 
this means the open door is still more widened ; 
since opposition provokes inquiry and observa- 
tion, and this begets conviction (Phil. i. 12).— 
Ver. 9. A true servant must not shrink from foes. 
He who is astonished and offended at oppositions 
and persecutions, forgets that he is a servant of 
the crucified.—We should prefer the honor of 
God and the good of our neighbor, to our own 
advantage and convenience; for love seeks not 
its own.—Ver. 10f. Faithful hearers deal faith- 
fully with their preachers, and do not despise 
them when young, if learned and pious. Chris- 
tians seek after, honor and love one another.— 
The crude multitude are astonished at this and 
cannot endure it.—Ver. 12. It is well for 
preachers to visit their hearers separately, as 
opportunities occur, and converse with them for 
their best good.—Ver. 13. Circumspection, faith 
and manly energy go well together. Faith as 
the chief thing occupies the middle place; and as it 
requires a careful circumspection, so does it also 
involve, and at the same time beget strength— 
the strength of the spirit.—A Christian is a sol- 
dier who is surrounded by foes. He must 
watch if he would not be surprised.—He must not 
abandon the post of faith, but strive on manfully 
and strengthen himself, and fill up the gaps after 
each attack in order to hold out against a new 
one.—Ver. 14. Love imparts to our actions their 
proper adaptations and right profit among men, 
as faith gives them their due weight (Gal. v. 6). 
Ver. 15f. Divine Providence has raised up 
many gallant men who have made themselves of 
great service to the church; and this fact should 
be recognized with gratitude, while we hearken 
to, and follow such.—Ver. 17f. The best satis- 
faction of a true preacher is the faith and love 
of his hearers.—Ver. 19. Christian churches 
should maintain friendship and communion with 
each other, edifying and precious in the sight of 
God (Col. iv. 15; Acts xv. 23).—Ver. 20. What 
else isa true greeting but the wishing well to an- 
other? Christians ought to desire and invoke all 
manner of good for each other.—Why should a 
kiss, the token of a pure spiritual and divine 
love, be made the token of a carnal, unchaste 
and devilish love? (Prov. vii. 13).—Ver. 22. 
Amen! yea cursed be he, who loveth not Thee. 
Oh thou friend of my soul! Take heed to thyself, 
thou poor creature! Paul’s zeal is discriminating 
and has shown its power in countless instances. 
But what thou, O Lord, blessest, is, and remains 
blessed.—_Since most persons persist in a state 
of prevailing worldliness and selfishness, incon- 
sistent with the love of Jesus, we can easily see 
how many there are whom this imprecation will 
hit.—Ver. 23. Grace! grace! To this everything 
comes at last in the restoration of sinners, as be- 
mg absolutely necessary for the forgiveness of 
fns and the recovery of fallen nature.—Ver. 24. 


863 





He is a true, dear man, in whom love dwells; he 
loves and is loved. Wellfor him! he will eat 
the fruits of love in eternity. 

BERLENBURGER Bipet:—Ver. 2. An illustra- 
tion of that wise moderation which belongs to 
Christianity everywhere. A reckless zeal never 
prospers. The case may be pressing, but the 
method of meeting it must be unconstrained.— 
Ver. 4f. Christians are ready for all manner 
of business; but they are no rovers who drive 
their traffic with their religion.—Ver. 6. What 
is done in faith through love, though apparently 
small, is in the sight of God a great thing.— 
Ver. 7. True Christians watch for the Lord’s 
hour.—Ver. 9. Resistance sharpens the zeal of 
God’s servants. When adversaries are many the 
spirit becomes more eager to preach the word, 
and hopes to find a yet more open door. God’s 
word will be confirmed by the cross.—But there 
are two kinds of opposition: 1. When many re- 
ceive the word with joy, others appear who 
resist the word and the good done—a sure sign 
that advantage has been gained. Then ought 
we to increase in courage as difficulties present 
themselves. 2. But when no one profits by the 
word, and will not so much as hear it, then 
must we take it elsewhere, and not desecrate it, 
by casting it before the unthankful.—Ver. 10f. 
It is not well for Christians not to be free with 
each other.—Ver. 12. Christians are ready for 
everything, but they do not act blindly.—Ver. 13. 
Watchfulness is the ground upon which all the 
rest is built. We must perpetually take heed to 
our own hearts; otherwise it will not be possible 
for us to stand and maintain our attitude as 
men.—Ver. 14. There is many a one who aims 
to be manly, but does not do it in love. Love 
is free, and seeks the good of a neighbor. Even 
the best and greatest duties toward God and our 
neighbor, if not prompted by love, are, in God’s 
sight, nothing worth—Love is the salt without 
which everything which we have and do is taste- 
less.—Ver. 15f. The most eminent must devote 
themselves to the service of the poor. But such 
persons are not to be abused, and to be regarded 
as common pursuivants; but they ought to be 
gratefully recognized and honored.—Ver. 19. 
Greeting serves for a genial bond of love.—Ver. 
22. Who is there that loves Jesus so that he aims 
to please Him and to follow Him and to become 
like Him, and think of Him constantly and 
occupies himself with Him! Oh, how many fall 
under Paul’s ban!—TZhe Lord cometh! Let Him 
judge; He will know how to avenge Himself 
on His unthankful servant, because he is absent 
people think themselves safe.—Ver. 28. This 
wish is hedged about by the previous warning, 
and such a warning must grace and love have, 
on account of our perilous condition.—Ver. 24. 
Fromthis we see thatthe rebukes given have been 
a work of pious affection. Oh, what a bond ig 
this! (John xvii. 22-26). 

R1iEGER:—Ver. 1 ff. To be obliged to seek assist- 
ance, and to receive favor from others, makes 
us of little account; but when persons, in such 
condition, are saints of God, and we know that 
God constrains His dearest children and most 
assured heirs of salvation to perform their pil- 
grimage under such circumstances, this awakens 
consideration.—Imitation in such cases must not 


804 





be on the score of shame, but it must be grounded 
on love in the heart; yet good examples do their 
part in exciting to good works (Heb. x. 24).— 
The word ‘‘beneficence”’ reminds one of the wise 
constitution of God, who allows His gifts to run 
through other hands, and gives to us that we 
may have to give to such as are needy, and does 
not Himself supply the wants of the needy, in 
order that others may have the opportunity of 
testifying through these of their faith, and hope, 
and love.—Ver. 12. We must carry nothing by 
force, nor interfere too much with the ways of 
others.—Ver. 13f. The word ‘watch’ belongs 
among the master-pieces of the Holy Ghost, since 
with this one word he enjoins the perpetual at- 
tention of the Christian to his whole duty, and 
so can awaken and arouse him to so great a de- 
gree.—To abide in the saving knowledge of God 
and of Christ and in constant trust toward God 
through Christ, expresses the whole of the Chris- 
tian state.—All a Christian’s strength, magna- 
nimity, zeal and earnestness, must be regulated 
by that love which seeks the honor of God, and 
the salvation of our neighbor.—Ver. 18. Even 
the most honest laborers and helpers of the truth 
may become so involved under disparaging trials, 
and be so overwhelmed with slanders, as to re- 
quire that something be spoken in their behalf. 
—Ver. 22. Love to Christ is the chief source 
from which the communion of saints derives its 
true form and character.—Ver. 23. A _ holy 
dread of the curse is sweetened by a cordial ad- 
dress to the believing friends of Christ. Grace 
helps us out of many sins; strengthens us against 
many a fall; sets dislocated members; removes 
difficulties; disconcerts Satan’s plans; stops 
scandals; maintains love in its course amid all 
varieties of gifts, until, through grace, we are 
made meet for that Kingdom, wherein the mani- 
foldness of gifts and benefits in all the saints 
shall be a subject of eternal wonder and praise. 
Amen! 

Hevuspner :—Ver. 2. Christian thrift collects 
together its spare money for others. To the 
Christian nothing is too small which has a value 
for love.—Ver. 9. God only can open an en- 
trance into the heart.—Where goodness prospers, 
wickedness is aroused.—Ver. 13. The conditions 
of growth in Christianity: 1. Watchfulness and 
prayer; 2. Stedfastness in the faith; 8. A de- 
cided, manly strength of will and independence, 
which, without regard to another’s will, does 
what is known to be good and right, and stands 
by it; 4. And, with all this, love.—Ver. 22. A 
want of love—coldness, indifference, makes a 
person unworthy of Christian fellowship. The 
Lord comes to judgment over such lukewarm 
Bouls. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 12. From this we may 
learn that Christian office-bearers of the right 


THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


- a 


sort do not rule over those subject to them arbi- 
trarily, as over servants; but exhort them as 
brethren, and respect their counter views when 
they are Christian.—Ver. 20. The Christian 
greeting draws those who are greeted into Christ. 
—Ver. 22. This word of condemnation standg 
written asa holy threatening for us all. That 
word of God, which is able to implant in our 
souls the love of the Lord Jesus Christ, is read 
by each one of us, either for a blessing or a 
curse. 

[CaLvin :—Ver. 15. If we wish to secure the 
welfare of the church, let us always take care 
that honor be conferred upon the good ; let their 
counsels have the greatest weight; let others 
give way to them, and allow themselves to be 
governed by their prudence. This Paul does in 
this instance, when admonishing the Corinthians, 
to show respect to the house of Stephanas]. 

[Ropertson:—Vv. 1, 2. A Jewish object 
supported by Gentile subscriptions!—a new 
thing in this world. To scattered races and di- 
vided peoples, to separate castes and ancient en~ 
mities, Christ was the magnet that united all.— 
Benumbed and paralyzed till then, the frame of 
humanity was made to throb with a common life. 
Hitherto men were combined by war and trade— 
now by religion and love.—In God’s counsels 
sorrow draws out good. Pain and sorrow are 
mysteries. Inexplicable often, why we are af- 
flicted; but sometimes the vail is withdrawn, 
and we see the reason clearly.—Charity must be 
systematic—a matter of principle; to give from 
impulse, often a mere luxury, costs but little,— 
whereas a true Christian economy involves self- 
denial—an abridging of pleasure to give to God. 
—Men do not give as God has prospered them, 
because they do not give systematically. Itisa 
fact, the more we have the less we give. System 
is easier with little than with much. The man 
of thousands squanders, and his indulgences, 
grown into necessities, leave him little to spare. 
—Vvy. 10-24. With Paul personal considerations 
were not lost in general philanthropy. He put 
value on the courtesies of life. There are minds 
which are indifferent to such things, and fancy 
themselves above them. But love is dependent 
on forms—courtesy of etiquette guards and pro- 
tects courtesy of heart.—Ver. 12. “ As touching 
our brother Apollos,”’—mark the perfect absence 
of all mean jealousy in St. Paul’s mind. This 
is magnanimity and true delicacy of heart. Vv. 
13, 14. If you think Christianity a feeble, soft 
thing, ill-adapted to call out the manlier features 
of character, read here, ‘‘Quit you like men.” 
(Abridged) ]. 

{Sermon. — Jon. Epwarps:—Vv. 1, 2. The 
perpetuity and change of the Sabbath. Complete 
works, vol. iv., p. 616 ff. 1. 


THE 


SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL 


TO THE 


SORINTHIAN S&. 


BY 


CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH KLING, 


DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY, AND LATE DEAN OF MARBACH ON THE NEOKAR. 


TRANSLATED FROM THE SECOND REVISED GERMAN EDITION, 
WITH ADDITIONS, 


BY 


CONWAY P. WING, D.D., 


PASTOR OF THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, CARLISLE, PA. 


NEW YORK: 
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS, 


743 AND 745 BROADWAY. 








ENTERED, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by 
CHARLES SCRIBNER, ἃ CO., 


In the Clerk’s wiuce of the District Court of the United States for the Southern 
of New York. 





D 


wy 


TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. 


As far as the following work professes to be a translation, the aim of the writer has been 
simply to transfer into his own language the meaning and spirit of the original. From this he 
has not felt at liberty to depart especially in the Critical and Exegetical department. In the 
Doctrinal and Homiletical portions he has ventured to throw out a few sentences which seemed 
to him repetitions of what had been better expressed. But on becoming thoroughly possessed 
of the idea of any sentence, he was quite careless of the peculiar forms and words of the original 
German, and only anxious to express that idea most perfectly in his own style and language. 
A single sentence only, which the author extracted from the Berlenb. Bible (Hom. Note on Chap. 
VII. 1), he has ventured to suppress on account of its irrelevancy and objectionable sentiment, 

With respect to the additions included in brackets, his object has been to fulfil, as far as his 
humble abilities and opportunities would permit, the promise of the general Editor, “to prepare 
on an evangelical basis, the very best commentary for practical use which the combined scholar- 
ship and piety of Europe and America can produce.” This seemed to him to demand that 
everything of real value relating to our Epistle in the writings of English and American com- 
mentators and divines should be incorporated in his work. If the amount of these additions (more 
than one fourth of the whole printed matter) should seem disproportionate to the general execu- 
tion and plan of the work, we are confident that to one who considers the amount of materials 
to be used, it will appear rather sparing than redundant. They are derived not merely from 
sources beyond the range of the German author. Greek, Latin, and even German writings have 
been drawn upon, although they must have passed under his eye, and been consciously omitted, 
He was, however, writing for a circle of readers, among whom a kind and degree of knowledge, 
and controversial questions were presupposed, very different from those which are common in 
this country. The authors of these suggestions are not always referred to in these notes, partly 
for brevity’s sake, but more frequently because they were derived from a variety of sources, and 
because it would now be difficult to trace them to their original authors. No small portion of 
the matter now used in biblical criticism has passed through medizval and patristic channels, 
and has now become the common property of the learned world. Were we to name any indi- 
vidual from whom we have immediately received any of this, we should probably give him a 
credit which belongs to some distant predecessor. The Translator has, however, enjoyed no 
small degree of pleasure in drawing from those ancient Greek expositors, whose works not only 
display an unusual freshness of illustration, but have a special authority on all questions relating 
to their own vernacular. A complete library of the Greek and Latin fathers has been opened 
to him (Patrologie, par J. P, Migné, Paris, 1844-65), and has been thoroughly consulted on 


every part of our Epistle. 
5 


vi TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. 
a a ee ee oe ee 








The plan announced in previous volumes required that the English authorized version should 
be the basis of our exposition. The present translator sympathizes with the desire so exten- 
. sively felt that general confidence in that version should not be impaired. He maintains with 
its warmest admirers that the actual necessities of orthodoxy and godly living have not yet 
sufficiently called for a revision of that version for common use. And yet the more one loves 
the precise words which the Holy Ghost has given to the church, the more anxious will he be 
to receive nothing in their place. The truest friends of inspiration and of divine truth, are those 
who will endure as little imperfection as possible both in what we call the original text, and in the 
translation we give to our children and our fellow-Christians. They will not be satisfied 
with the freedom of our Bibles from fatal errors, but they will be anxious to present God’s word 
in the purest form possible far spiritual edification. LEvery shade of revealed truth will be pre- 
cious to such as long for the whole mind of Jesus. : 

In a work intended principally for those who aim at a high degree of Scriptural knowledge, 
the first object must therefore be to obtain an accurate, original text. The Translator, with his 
earlier associates, believes that the recently awakened and rapidly increasing interest in sacred 
criticism demands a tolerably full statement of the reasons on which the more important critical 
conclusions are founded. Special manuals on this subject are not as common in this country as 
in Germany. He has therefore usually added to the author's general statements the documentary 
evidence which may be adduced to sustain them. Since Dr. Kling published his commentary, 
some works have appeared which must also modify some of his conclusions, Among these may be 
mentioned especially the much enlarged seventh edition of the New Testament, and the Codex 
Sinaiticus, with the various readings of the Vaticanus, which TiscHENDORF has published; the . 
collations of the Sinaiticus, with the text of Robert Stephens in 1550, by the Rev. F. H. Scrr- 
VENER; and the numerous collections of Draw Atrorp in the fifth edition of his Greek Testa- 
ment. Not only has the Translator made use of these, so as to supply a few new readings, and 
to change some former decisions of our author, but he has carefully verified many statements by 
a reference to the Codices in his own possession (A. B. D. Sinait.), the Vulgate, and the Greek, and 
the Latin fathers. He regrets that the works on which TischeNDoRF (N. Test., 8th edit., and 
a new version of the Vaticanus), TREGELLEs, and Exxicort are now employed, have not yet 
reached that portion of the New Testament to which the present commentary relates. Emi- 
nent English examples would have warranted a much fuller list of various readings, but only 
such have been inserted as were thought obviously to affect the force or beauty of the original. 

The next object would be to present as perfect an English translation of the original text as 
possible. In the present work, this has hardly been attempted. It would have seemed incon- 
sistent with the use to be made of the authorized version. He has therefore contented himself 
with inserting in that version some of the most important emendations required by the critical 
notes. We have, however, thrown into black letter type in the midst of the exegetical notes 
an almost continuous new translation. In a few instances we have here used paraphrastic rather 
than literal renderings, and often have sacrificed the elegance which a common version would | 
have required, that the objects of the commentary might be more perfectly secured. The inser- 
tion of this translation has sometimes necessitated a slight alteration of the author’s sentences. 

In the Exegetical department he has usually been satisfied with the judicious, condensed, 
and often admirably expressed comments of the author on all subjects embraced by his design. 
On other points the Translator’s object has been to supply what the author took for granted in 
the studies of his readers, but which hardly exists among our hard-worked clergy with their 


TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. vii 


fa a 


scanty libraries. The more extended notices of particular words or passages, which would have 
broken too much upon the course and proportions of the author’s comments, have been thrown 
into notes in the margin. As our readers will perceive, special importance has been attached, to 
the grammatical forms and the uniformity of meaning to be given to each word. The last thirty 
years have done much to give precision to the language of the New Testament. It has been 
found to be very far from the indefinite and vague thing which older interpreters sometimes 
represented it to be. No longer will it do to say that the apostles used one-case of a noun, one 
tense or mood of a verb, or one particle, for another; or that the position of the words at the 
beginning, middle or end of a sentence is a matter of indifference. The more scientific principle 
must doubtless prevail, that they used words with a uniform signification, and placed them in 
the position which emphasis and truth required, so that no change in these particulars could be 
made without perverting the writer’s meaning. Many of the Greek and Latin words and sen- 
tences have been translated, so that even the merely English reader will not find it difficult to 
follow the author’s comments. 

In the Doctrinal and Homiletical departments he was tempted to make considerable changes, 
and was only restrained by the nature of his position as a translator. They do these things se 
differently in Germany, that if their work might sometimes instruct us by contrast, it seems too 
far removed from our track of thought essentially to aid us. He commenced with marking many 
passages for omission, and with substituting an equal amount of extracts from our English and 
American divines, but he soon discovered that he was going beyond his proper limits. He has 
therefore seldom attempted to curtail our author’s extracts, and has contented himself with the 
addition of a few doctrinal inferences bearing upon the literature of the day, and a single series 
of expository hints which the habits of some of our churches happily demand, 


CARLISLE, July 4, 1867. 
Cc, P. WING. 


ον Poni) 8-1 eS ae 
Ἢ ὍΝ nd a ᾿ vite Bila) to ΟἹ end 
Bessie leith, | ! ah eh OS 

, by al ᾽ 

ΩΣ 
ἵν γυν δὼ 4 


rip | 


eh Sk nh aS | 





“2 PP eae fa 





THE 


SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





21. ITS GENUINENESS AND INTEGRITY. 


[The external evidence in behalf of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is incontestible, 
and has never been assailed by the most unfriendly criticism. It reaches as far back as the 
generation immediately after the Apostles themselves. From the peculiar character of the Epis- 
tle, we should not expect to find it quoted as frequently as some other portions of the New Tes- 
tament, and yet it is easy to select abundant testimony to satisfy us of its authenticity. Clement 
of Rome (A. D. 91-101), in his Epistles to the same Corinthians, assumes the existence and pe- 
culiar contents of Paul’s two Epistles, and in his Epistles ad Virgines (in Syriac and Latin, Ep. I. 
cap. xii.) he quotes the exclamation (2 Cor. xi. 29): Quis infirmatur, et ego non infirmor, etc., 
and in. cap, xili., fin., the words (2 Cor. vi. 21): providentes bona, non solum eoram Deo, etc., 
and in Ep..ii. cap. ili. fin., the two passages (2 Cor. vi. 3 and v. 11): Memini danies ullam offen- 
sionem, etc.,.and Scientes ergo timorem Domini, etc. Polycarp (A. Ὁ. 169), in his Ep. ad Phi- 
lipp. 3 6,.uses the words (2 Cor. vill. 21): προνοοῦντες det τοῦ καλου ἐνώπιον θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων. 
Athenagoras of Athens (A. D.177), in his treatise De resurr. mort. 3 18 (Migne. Patrol. T. VI. p. 
1012), says:. εὔδηλον παντὶ τὸ λειπόμενον, ὅτι-δεῖ κατὰ τὸν ᾿Απόστολον τὸ φθαρτὸν τοῦτο καὶ διασκεδαστὸν 
ἐνδύσασθαι ἀφθαρσίαν, ἵνα, ζωοποιηθέντων ἐξ ἀναστάσεως τῶν νεκρωθέντων, καὶ πάλιν ἑνωθέντων τῶν; 
κεχωρισμένων, ἢ καὶ πάντη διαλελυμένων, ἕκαστος κομίσηται δικαίως ad διὰ τοῦ σώματος ἔπραξεν, εἴτε ἀγαθὰ 
εἴτε κακά. Trenzeus of Lyons (A. Ὁ. 177-202), in his treatise Contra Heer. Lib. II. cap. xxx. 3 7 
quotes and comments upon Paul’s account of his rapture to the third heaven (2 Cor. xii. 2 f.); 
in Lib. III. cap. vii. 3 1. he mentions our Epistle by name (in secwnda ad Corinthios), and com- 
ments extensively upon the expression: in quibus Deus seculi hujus exceecavit mentes infidelium ; 
in Lib, IV. cap. xxvi. 2 4 he says: Οὔτω Παῦλος * * Κἀπελογεῖτο ορινθὶοις" ov γὰρ ἐσμεν ὡς οἱ roAAol,. 
καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ. * * καὶ μετ᾽ ὁλιγὰ" οὐδένα ἠδικήσαμεν καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς (2 Cor. ii. 17); in Lib.. 
V.cap.v. 9.1: Δικαίοις γὰρ ἀνθρώποις, καὶ πνευματοφόροις ἡτοιμάσθη ὁ Παράδεισος, ἐν ᾧ καὶ Παῦλος ἀπόστολος" 
εἰσκομισθεὶς ἤκουσεν ἀῤῥητα ῥήματα, ὡς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ παρόντι (2 Cor. xii. 2); in Lib. V. cap. xiii. 33: 
Kai διὰ τοῦτο Φήσιν: "Iva καταποθνῇ τὸ θνητὸν ὑπὸ τῆς ζωῆς. Ὁ δὲ κατεργασάμενος ἡμᾶς εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο. 
θέος, ὁ καὶ δοὺς ἡμῖν τὸν ἀῤῥαβῶνα τοῦ πνεύματος (2 Cor. v. 4, 5, and i. 22); and in Lib. V. cap. xiii. 
2 4, he quotes 2 Cor. iv. 10, and 111. 8, and in Lib. IV. cap. xxix. 3 1 he quotes again 2 Cor. iv.. 
4. Clement of Alexandria (A. D. 191-202) quotes from our Epistle not less than twenty diffe- 
rent times, as 6. g., in. Peedag. Lib. X. cap. vi. he refers to Paul’s rapture in the third heavens; 
in Lib. II. cap. viii. he cites in full 2 Cor. ii. [4-16 and a few sentences afterwards 2 ΟΟΥ, v. 7; im 
Strom. Lib. III. capp. xii and xiv. he quotes what Paul says of Satan’s beguiling Hve; in Lib. 
TV. cap. vii. Paul’s description of the weapons of his spiritual warfare; in Lib. IV. cap. xvi. what 
6’ Απόστολος---εἴρηκεν ἐν τῇ δευτέρα πρὸς κορινθίους, etc, (citing the whole of 2 Cor. i. 12, and ii. 14, 
and a few sentences after 2 Cor. iii. 14). See also Pedag. Lib. III. cap. iii. (2 Cor. xiii. 5), cap, 
xi. (2 Cor. viii. 21 f.), Strom. Lib. I. cap. i. (2 Cor. vi. 4, 10, 11), cap. xi. (2 Cor. 1. 9 f.), Lib. 11. 
eap. xix. (2 Cor. viii, 12 f.), Lib, III. cap. i. (2 Cor, xi. 13, 15), cap. xi. (2 Cor. vii. 1), Lib, IV. 


2 YNTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
RN ee ee a aa ΞΟ  ΈΕΞ ΞΞΒΞΞΕΕ 
cap. 8. tin. (2 Cor. xi. 23), cap. xxi. (2 Cor. iv. 7-9; vi. 3-7, 16-19, vii. 1, 9-11), cap. xxvi. (2 
Cor. νυ. 1-3, 7-8, 9). Tertullian of Carthage (A. D. 190-220), frequently quotes our Epistle, as 
in Pudic. cap. xii: Revera enim suspicantur apostolum Paulum, in secunda ad Corinthios, 
eidem fornicatori veniam dedisse, ywem in prima dedendum Satane interitum carmis pronun- 
ciarit impium patris de matrimonio heredem; quasi que ipsam postea stylum verterit scribens: 
Si quis autem contristant, non me contristanit, etc. (asin 2 Cor. ii. 5-11).— With respect alsa 
to the internal evidence for the Pauline origin of our Epistle, there can be no ques- 
tion. Every part of it breathes the very purpose and spirit of the great Apostle to the Gen- 
tiles, his peculiar position with reference to the Mosaic Institute (chap. 111.), his joyfulness amid 
extreme labors, perils and distresses (chapp. iv. and xi.), his views of reconciliation by Christ 
and the preaching of it (chap v.), his delicacy in the treatment of erring brethren (chapp. vii, 
and viii.), his refusal to build on the foundation of others (chap. x.), and his estimate of his in- 
firmities and revelations of the Lord (chap. xii.). Probably no portion of the New Testament 
exhibits the peculiar character of the writer, even when under Divine inspiration, better than 
this. Dr. Paley, in his Hore Pauline, has here found unusually rich materials for his work, 
of exhibiting undesigned coincidences with the history in Acts, and with Paul’s other Epistles,] 
It is only with reference to the wnity of our Epistle, that some doubts have been raised, 
The earliest of these were advanced by Semler, who makes the first eight chapters [with Rom. 
xvi.], and chap. xiii. 11-13 constitute one Epistle; the tenth and as far as ver. 10 of the last 
chapter a second; and chap. ix. [a small circular Epistle, addressed not to the Corinthians, but 
to the Christians of Achaia]. Weber, near the same time, contended that there were only two 
distinct Epistles, viz.: the first composed of the first nine chapters with chap. xii. 11-13, and 
the second composed of the remainder of our present Epistle. Ata later period, von Greeve, of 


the Netherlands, made the first Epistle consist of the first eight chapters with chap. xii. 11-13, 


and the second of the remainder of our present Epistle. [Quite recently C. H. Weisse (Philos, 


Dogm. Vol I. p. 145) maintains, with much confidence, that our Epistle is composed of three 


distinct circular Epistles directed at different times to the Cormthian Church, of which the first 
‘and main part of the present Epistle (chapp. i. vil. with xiii, 11-13) was the latest; and that 
these were put together in their present form by some other hand (perhaps Timothy’s, and possi- 
bly with the Apostle’s own approbation and direction)]. These views are, to some extent, in 
opposition to the best critical authorities, and, even where they have some plausible grounds for 
their support, will not bear a thorough investigation. [They are derived from the conceded fact 
that two or three subjects of a very different character are discussed, and that a spirit of an 
almost opposite nature pervades the different parts of the Epistle. So obvious are these that 
even Wieseler (Chron. d Apostelgesch. ¢ 357 f.) telt constrained to recognize a chronological di- 
vision of the Epistle, and to suppose that the first part as far as chap. vii, 1, was written under 
ithe depression which the Apostle felt before the arrival of Titus, and that the remaining portion 


‘was composed under the excitement which the joyful tidings then received produced upon his mind]. 


But we discover no decisive evidence of such a new commencement at, chap. vii. 2, nor is it pro- 
bable that the triumphant passage which occurs in chap. ii. 14 would have been written under 
‘depression. The abrupt transition from the first to the second verse of chap. vii., and the slight 
‘connection between the thirteenth and fourteenth verses of the sixth chapter, by no means jus- 
tify the assumption that the Apostle inserted the intervening passage (vi, 14; vii. 1) “in conse- 


quence of the sudden occurrence of these thoughts to his mind.” But we regard the opinion 


which Schreeder has advanced, that this passage is unworthy of the enlarged spirit of the Apos- 
tle to the Gentiles, and must have been added by some later hand; and the similar one which 
Ewald has advocated, that this paragraph was an extract from an Epistle of some unknown 
Apostolic writer, but was hardly worthy of the profound and generous spirit of Paul, as the off- 
spring of an arbitrary and peculiar prejudice. Even if the connection between the different parts 
of our Epistle were more indistinct, and the transitions from the one to the other were much 
more abrupt than they actually are (comp. Osiander Zinl. 27), they ought to awaken no sur- 
prise in an Epistle [composed in the midst of a journey, under overwhelming cares and circum- 
stances of extraordinary vicissitude, by a writer of more than common sympathies, and with 


reference to classes of persons so different as were the sincere but erring brethren at Corinth and- 


ὰ... 


23. OCCASION AND DESIGN OF THE SECOND EPISTLE. 3 





their corrupt and schismatical seducers. And yet, notwithstanding the varieties of subject and 
tone which are found in our Epistle, the whole is pervaded by a single purpose and spirit, the 
object of which was to heal the divisions which had commenced and threatened such serious con- 
sequences in the church, and to establish believers there in their former confidence in Paul. We 
discover nothing but the various actings of the same mind in its necessary changes, while con- 
templating what it loves and what it abhors; and the very fact that some passages in our Epistle 
have been fitted into their connections with so little an appearance of design, indicates that they 
were the natural outpouring of a spontaneous but conflicting emotion]. 


@ 2. TIME AND PLACE OF ITS COMPOSITION. 


That the Second Epistle must have been written soon after the First is evident (comp. 
Osiander, Hind. 3 3) from its entire spirit and contents, from the course and condition of things 
at Corinth, and from the anxious suspense which the writer shows with regard to events imme- 
diately anticipated. [In that first Epistle (chap. xvi. 8) he had announced that it was his in- 
tention to remain at Ephesus until Pentecost, but (chap. xvi. 5) that he expected soon to reach 
Corinth by way of Macedonia, and to spend the winter there. His actual departure from Ephe- 
sus may have been hastened by the insurrection against him there, but we know that he tarried 
for a short time at Troas on his journey to Macedonia. From his extreme anxiety to meet Titus 
(2 Cor. ii, 12) he did not tarry as long as he had intended at Troas, but he pressed forward to 
Macedonia. There he must have continued long enough before he wrote the Second Epistle to 
ascertain the mind of the churches in that region, and partially at least to make the collection 
(vii. 1-5). Then it was that he wrote our Epistle, and soon after went to Corinth where he 
abode three months (Acts xx. 3), and then returned so as to be in Macedonia at Easter on his 
way to Jerusalem at Pentecost. It is evident from these facts that our Second Epistle must have 
been written when he was in Macedonia, some time during the summer or autumn after he left 
Ephesus. But the year on which he wrote is not quite certain. Whatever be the year on which 
the First Epistle was written (either A. D. 57 or 58, see Introd. to the First Epistle) it is plain 
that the Second was written only afew months later. Even if it must be assigned to a different 
year (comp. 2 Cor. viii. 10, and ix. 2), we are not obliged to suppose the intervention of a whole 
twelvemonth between the two (Osiander p, 23).] We are not, however, quite sure that the pre- 
cise place was Philippi [as the Vatican and most of the later MSS. with the old Syriac version, 
assert. That the bearers were Titus and his associates, is apparently substantiated by chap. viii. 
23, and ix. ὃ, 5; Ellicott in Smith's Dict. Art. Corinthians, 11. Epist.]. 


23. OCCASION AND DESIGN OF THE SECOND EPISTLE. 


About the time the First Epistle had been despatched, the Apostle was induced probably 
by the representations of some mentioned in 1 Cor. xvi. 17, to send Timothy, who was going to 
Macedonia and Achaia, to the Corinthian Church, in order to revive in them “the remembrance 
of his ways in Christ” (1 Cor. iv. 17), and to induce them to follow out his policy. But as our 
Epistle contains no reference to Timothy’s visit or to its results at Corinth, nor to any account 
through him of the effects of Paul’s First Epistle, some have concluded that he must have been either 
interrupted in his journey, or recalled by the Apostle himself. Such a reference, however, ought 
not to have been very confidently expected in an Epistle where Timothy was associated as a 
writer. Certainly if Paul had recalled a messenger whose coming had been so distinctly an- 
nounced, we should suppose he would have felt called upon to justify such a proceeding against 
the objections of his opponents. We conclude, therefore, that he had received through Timothy 
some account of the state of the Corinthian Church, and that these had produced disquietude in 
his mind (chap. ii. 12; vii. 5 ff.), especially when he found that Timothy had been obliged to cut 
short his visit there, and to hasten to meet Paul at Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 11). It was not until 
the return of Titus, whom he had sent after Timothy (perhaps after Timothy’s return) and after 
he had sent off his First Epistle (according to de Wette and others from solicitude about the im- 
pression that Epistle had produced), that he could hear any thing to quiet his apprehensions. 
This must have been the more painful and protracted, inasmuch as Titus had tarried beyond the 
expected time in order to make arrangements for the collection (2 Cor. viii. 6). 


4 INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE JORINTHIANS. 








Between the First and Second Epistle, Bleek and others have supposed that the Apostle 
was induced by the unfavorable account through Timothy to write and send by the hands of 
Titus another Epistle, and that this was the occasion for the anxiety with which he looked for 
Titus’ return. We see no occasion for such a supposition, inasmuch as there had been quite 
enough in his First Epistle (chap. ui. 2 ff; iv. 8, 18 ff; v. 1 ff; vi. 8, xi, 17; 1]. 16, iv. 1 ff; ix. 
14, 18; xv. 8, 10), to give occasion for excusing his apparent severity toward them and his 
boasting of himself (comp. in opposition to Bleek, an Art. in the Stud. u, Krit. 1830, p. 625 ff; 
Mueller, de tribus P. iten. p. 34 Εν; Wiirm, Tub Zeitschr. 1833, 1. 66 ff; Wieseler, Chron. d. 
apost. Zeit. p. 368 ff.; Baur Paulus, p. 327 ff. (Comp. 2 6]. 

To bring the Corinthians more completely to a proper state of mind, and that on his antici- 
pated visit he might have no reason for severity but unite with them in joyful and sincere 
thanksgivings to God, the Apostle now wrote them aSecond Epistle. In this he endeavors, in the 
First Part,to present before them their true relations to him and to his office, by reminding them 
of their common sufferings, consolations and prayers (chap. i. 3 ff.), by removing from himself 
all appearance of insincerity, duplicity and instability, and by showing that the change in his 
plans respecting his journey which had exposed him to such imputations, sprung from a desire 
to spare them unnecessary pain (chap. i. 12 ff.). He assures them that the severity which had 
characterized some portions of his First Epistle, had no other origin than his love to them, and 
he now comes to a friendly understanding with them with reference to his main design to pro- 
duce in them the state of mind which they had actually attained (chap. 1. 1-11). He then re- 
minds them that his work was acceptable to God both in them that perished and in them that were 
saved (chap. ii. 3 ff.), and that they themselves had witnessed his sincerity in handling the word 
of God and the effects of his labors at Corinth, he extols the glory of his office, brings to their re- 
collection the honesty and purity of conduct with which he had performed the duties of that 
office among them, and contrasts both the office and his conduct with the legal services of the 
Old Testament dispensation. He accounts for the different results of his preaching, by ascribing 
the one to the blinding influence of Satan and the other to the illuminating power of God (chap. 
iv. 1-4, 6), assures them that both his present afflictions and his future glory would redound to 
the divine honor and their benefit, and takes occasion in passing to set in its true light the gene- 
_ ral bearing of present afflictions and infirmities upon the heavenly state (chap. iv. 7 ff.; v.1, ff.), 
He then directs their thoughts to the connection between his hope of future glory and his con- 
tinual efforts to. please the Lord; and this brings him to another avowal of the sincerity with 
which he had performed his official duties. This he traces to the essential nature of the scheme 
of salvation, whose excellence leads him to admonish them with great earnestness not to receive 
the grace of God in vain, but to appropriate to themselves all its benefits (chap. v. 9; vi. 10.) 
Having demanded, therefore, of them a reciprocation of his overflowing love and confidence, he 
urges them to renounce all fellowship with every form of idolatry, and gives utterance to his joy 
over the final effects of his former Epistle though it had at first so much disturbed them (chap. 
vi. 11; vii. 16), The confidence they had thus reposed in him he endeavors to confirm; and he 
begins in the Second Part of his Epistle to interest them in the collections he was then making; 
and endeavors to awaken in them a spirit of emulation by reminding them of what other churches 
had done. He does not, however, leave this point without presenting before them higher mo- 
tives, and pointing them to the benefits which beneficence- would surely bring. In the midst of 
these exhortations he takes occasion to explain his own proceedings with reference to these col- 
lections (chap. viii. and ix.). 

In the early and more apologetic portion of his Epistle he had given some attention to pole- 
mical questions as they came across his track of thought, but in the 7’ird Part, he devotes to 
these a more special discussion. Even here, however, he mingles with his assaults upon his op- 
ponents, earnest admonitions of those who had listened to such teachers and occasionally defends 
his personal and official conduct (chap. x. et seq.). With some severe reproof for immoralities 
yet remaining in the church (chap. xii. 20; xiii. 6), he subsides into a milder and more hopeful 
tone, and concludes with cordial encouragements and an all-comprehensive Benediction (chap. 
xiii, 7 ff). 


¢ 5. ITS CONTENTS AND IMPORTANCE. δ 
cE tN Ny EIS SE aM eS SS Og τσ Τὺ δοκι λέτε το 
From this general view of the contents of our Epistle, its Design becomes quite evident. 
Every thing was directed to the restoration and confirmation of the Apostle’s authority which 
had been so bitterly and obstinately assailed, and the removal of all hinderances to his efforts for 
their welfare. The majority being won over to his side, the way was open to bring back to obe- 
dience those among the people who still opposed him. “Τὸ do this he was obliged to clear away 
the prejudices which had been raised against him, and to discover the insincerity and perverse- 
ness of those who had seduced them. These were evidently Judaizers (comp. chap. xi. 22). It 
is still a matter of controversy whether they belonged to the Petrine or to the Christ party. 
Against those who maintain that they belonged to the former (Meyer and others), it has truly 
been objected (Osiander), that our Epistle never hints at Peter as the head of their party, and 
even the phrase τῶν ὑπερλίαν ἀποστόλων (chap. xi. 5, and xii. 11) cannot refer to our Lord’s Apostles. 
That they belonged to the latter party is also argued from the fact that the idea of the Christ 
party seems to be implied in chap. x. 7, that a rejection of a// apostolic authority seems hinted 
at in the words τῶν ὑπερλίαν ἀποστόλων, and that a number of indications are given that they had 
departed from the commonly received doctrine with respect to the person of Jesus (chap. xi. 12; 
ii. 17), They seem, however, to have been especially distinguished for their opposition to Paul’s 
apostolic authority, and for their zeal in behalf of the Jewish law and for Christianity as a 
merely legal system (comp. Osiander 2 4). 





24. STYLE. 


[‘‘The contrast between the First and Second Epistle is in no respect more obvious than in its 
style. Not only are the subjects perpetually varied and the characters rapidly shifting, but the 
manner and spirit of the writer are remarkably diverse. Consolation and rebuke, gentleness and 
severity, earnestness and irony succeed one another at brief intervals and unexpectedly.” ALFoRD. 
Meyer remarks: “The excitement and interchange of the affections and probably also the haste 
under which Paul wrote the Epistle, certainly render the expressions often obscure and the con- 
structions difficult; but they serve only to exalt our admiration of the great oratorical delicacy, art 
and power with which this outpouring of Paul’s spirit) especially interesting as a self-defence, 
flows and streams onward, till its billows finally overflow the whole opposition of his adversaries.” 
Erasmus remarks also, that “the difficulty of grasping the precise mind of this divine rhetorician 
far exceeds that which is felt in comprehending that of ordinary poets and orators; that he is so 
full of turns and delicate allusions, that one is constantly at a loss to know what he is doing, whither 
he is driving, and what he is opposing. So skilful are his arts that you can hardly believe he is at 
different times the same man. Now he boils up like a limpid spring, suddenly he rolls away with 
a great noise like a mighty torrent bearing all before it, and then he flows gently along, or 
expands like a placid lake over all the land. Sometimes he quite loses himself as it were in the 
sand, but all at once he breaks out at some unexpected point.”—Paraph., p.58. ‘Though this 
Epistle is, perhaps, the least methodical of Paul’s writings, it is among the most interesting, as 
it brings out the man most distinctly before the reader, and reveals his intimate relations to the 
people among whom he labored.” —Honee. ] 


@ 5. ITS CONTENTS AND IMPORTANCE. 


[The interest of the Second, even more than that of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, is 
principally historical. From the peculiar circumstances which called it forth, the Apostle was 
led to dwell much upon what was personal to himself and to those whom he addressed. We 
have nowhere else so clear an insight into the character and life of an apostle, and it 1s remark- 
able that while no other portion of Paul’s life could have been more active and eventful, wa 
have scarcely any notice of the period which here comes before us, except what is contained in 
our Epistle. Many circumstances here supplied seem indispensable to the understanding of what 
is related in the Acts and the other Epistles (comp. Paley in Hor. Pawl.). We are especially 
here shown the high moral and religious spirit of the Apostle, his self-sacrificing devotion to the 
welfare of his converts, and the honorable principles which governed his conduct towards his 
fellow-laborers, All this, however, is mingled, as usual in his writings, with evangelical maxims 


“a 


6 INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





and doctrines of a general nature, which make our Epistle of no small importance to theological 
science; and certainly no portion of the Epistles has supplied richer materials for homiletic use. 
Among the historical notices of great value may be mentioned Paul’s abounding consolations 
under severe afilictions, his probable visit and letter to the Corinthians of which we have no 
other account, and the narrative of his ecstasy and revelations. Important doctrinal statements 
are also given respecting the testimony of conscience (i. 12-14), the power of the Church in cases 
of discipline (ii. 3-8), the contrast between the Christian and the Mosaic dispensations (iii. 8-18), 
the prospect of a building of God, a house not made with hands, in the heavens (v. 1-8), the 
objects of the death of Christ and the nature of the reconciliation effected by Him (ν. 14-21; viii. 
9), the duty of separation from the world (vi. 14-18), the nature of godly sorrow and repentance 
(vii. 8-11), the true method of charitable contributions (viii, 1; ix. 15), the limits and nature of 
inspiration (viii. 8,10), and the signs of a Divine Apostleship (xii. 12)—On this whole subject, 
however,] we may adopt the animated representation of Osiander (Hind. 35). Having given us 
his view of the contents of the Epistle, he proceeds to point out, first, the admirable psycholo- 
gical order and psychagogical [persuasive] method which the Apostle must have had in his mind, 
and then the ample range of subjects through which the discussion of an occasional topic leads 
him, the excitement which his immediate relations to his readers awakened, the grouping together 
of special and general, of temporal and eternal, of historical and didactic subjects; the animated 
introduction of historical incidents, and the felicitous blending together of his own official and 
private affairs; the gradual combination of these with the interests of the Church, and the affairs 
of each congregation with those of the general Church, and of all these with the cause of Christ. 
We have then an admirable picture of the Apostolic office, standing out so prominently in the 
Epistle as to control every part, sometimes in the representation of the Apostle himself, wisely, 
lovingly and energetically performing the hardest services in the most trying situations; but 
sometimes also in profound theoretic statements of its essential nature (chap. ili., iv.). We are 
then presented with a beautiful and thorough confirmation and completion of some discussions 
which had been only broached in his First Epistle (chap. iii., iv., xil. 5), as, 6. g., the power of 
the keys, there to bind, here to loose; the object, influence, institution, trials, consolations, 
distresses, helps, toils and fruits, dignities and burdens, of his office. In the midst of these 
discussions, however, he is very naturally led to a consideration of the doctrine of the cross (iy. 
6), of the power of the Divine Word (chap. ii.), of the law and the Gospel (iii. 4), of the resur- 
rection, of reconciliation and justification (v.), of regeneration (v. 6), of repentance (vil. 10 ἢ), and 
of Christian beneficence (collections), every thing and every subject is contemplated only as it is 
related to Christ; and He is the measure of all things. Profound analogies and demonstrations, 
as well as typical illustrations, are taken from the work of creation (iv. 6), and from the Jewish 
dispensation and its ministers (111. 7 ff), and his arguments are confirmed by examples and testi- 
monies from the Jewish Scriptures (vi. 16 ff; viii. 15; ix. 7,9). In the principal passages, we 
have sometimes startling illustrations for the development of his subject, derived from sacred 
history, from nature, and from common life (iii, 3; xi. 3; ix. 6, 10); more frequent solemn affirma- 
tions for the confirmation of his assertions than he is accustomed to give (i. 18, 23; xi. 31; xii, 2) 
produced by the fervency of his zeal and his absolute certainty with respect to what he was saying 
and the falsehoods against which he was contending. We have every yicissitude of feeling, deep 
depression and high exhilaration, humble prostration and lofty enthusiasm, painful apprehensions 
and satisfying consolations, efe., all apparently united by a very slight thread of association, but 
really forming a harmonious work of art in the most perfect unity of truth and love, Finally, 
with respect to Janguage, we recognize the influence not only of the limited knowledge and 
movements of the age, but of the intense mental agitations of that period; and yet with all its 
harshness, rigidity and broken sentences, our Epistle is an admirable mirror of the Apostle’s 
actual state of mind, filled as it was and made eloquent by the Spirit of God. Truths of the 
utmost importance are communicated in a style of eminent, though frequently anomalous, beauty 
(comp. Meyer, Zin. p. δ). 





. 





IE rs a 


ξ6, THE APOSTLE’S VISITS AND LOST LETTER TO THE CORINTHIANS. 7 
ee a. eee ah er aN GEIR EER eE TST Te Sha ht ae See ee ry — 


(26. THE APOSTLE’S VISITS, AND LOST LETTER TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


Two questions, necessarily raised in the interpretation of our Epistle, seem to demand 
consideration in this Introduction. The First relates to the number of visits which the Apostle 
made to Corinth. “It seems distinctly implied in chap. xii. 14; xiii. 1, 2, that he had been there 
twice before the time at which he was writing. St. Luke, however, only mentions one visit 
prior to that time (Acts xvui. 1, sq.), for the visit recorded in Acts xx. 2, 3, was confessedly 
subsequent. If, with Grotius and others, we assume that in chap. xiii. 14 τρίτον belongs to 
ἑτοίμως ἔχω and not to ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, we still have in chap. xiii. 1, the definite words τρίτον τοῦτο 
ἔρχομαι, which seem. totally to preclude any other meaning than this—that the Apostle had 
visited them twice before, and was now on the eve of going to them a third time. The ordinary 
subterfuge that ἔρχομαι is here equivalent to ἑτοίμως ἔχω ἐλθέιν (80 actually A. and the Arabic (Erp.), 
and Coptic versions), is grammatically indefensible, and would never have been thought of, if 
the narrative of the Acts had not seemed to require it. We must assume, then, that the Apostle 
made a visit to Corinth which St. Luke was not moved to record, and which, from its probably 
short duration, might easily have been omitted in a narrative which is more a general history of 
the Church in the lives of its chief teachers, than a chronicle of annalistic detail. So Chrysostom 
and his followers, Oecumenius and Theophylact, and, in recent times, Mueller (de tribus Pauli 
ttin.), Auger (Rat. temp. p. 70 sq.), Wieseler (Chronol. p. 239), and the majority of modern 
critics. It has formed a further subject of inquiry whether, on this supposition, the visit to 
Corinth is to be regarded only as the return there from a somewhat lengthened excursion during 
the eighteen months’ stay at that city (Auger), or whether it is to be referred to the period of the 
three years’ residence at Ephesus. The latter has most supporters, and seems certainly more 
natural” (Ellicott, in Smuth’s Dict. of the Bib.). On the other hand, it must be conceded that 
Paul’s expressions in chap. 1. 15 and xiii. 2, seem to imply that he had been there but once, ang 
can only be explained on the supposition that his visit was so short and sad (chap. 11. 1), that it 
was not brought into consideration (comp. Wordsworth on 11. 1 and xiii. 1). 

The Second question relates to the mwmber of letters which Paul wrote to the Corinthian 
Church. We can hardly hope te attain a certain answer to this question; and so far as reference 
is had to one supposed to have been written before our extant First, and referred to in 1 Cor. v, 
9, we have nothing at present to do. Our only inquiry is, whether the numerous allusions it 
the Second Epistle to a letter which he speaks of by way of eminence as “the Epistle,” was not 
one sent at some time between the First and Second, but now lost? Neander (Planting and 
Training, Philada., 1844, p. 156), contends that it was, and that it was sent by the hands of 
Titus. He thinks that Paul would not have sent Titus on such an errand without some words 
of explanation however few; and that in this Epistle, so brief and so temporary in its interest 
as not to be thought worthy of preservation, the Apostle used expressions of severity which 
caused intense anxiety as soon as it was gone. On this supposition he explains much of the 
language of the Epistle (which seems to him so strong as to be extravagant, on any other suppo- 
sition), respecting his severity and his solicitude regarding its effects (2 Cor. vii. 8, 12, etc.). He 
also thinks that, Timothy having failed to reach Corinth, and reports having come to Paul of 
the unhappy state of the Corinthians, Titus was sent to supply the place of Timothy and to do 
something to recover them, and Paul himself declined going at that time lest he should have to 
proceed to extremity. Hither the incestuous person had proved rebellious and was raising parties 
there, or persons had come from abroad who had conducted toward the Apostle with. great 
insolence. Paul wrote words of stern rebuke, not for his cause who had done wrong, nor for his 
cause who had suffered wrong (either himself or the father of the incestuous person), but for 
their good (vii. 12). With Neander agree also Olshausen, Credner, J. L. Davies (im Smith’s 
Dict., art. Paul), Alford says: “It may have been so,” but many (Kling and others) think 
that more decided allusions to such an Epistle might have been expected had it existed and been 
of so much importance in Paul’s mind.] 


Y Bel 


a) ee) .- 


. ἢ ros hy ve ia 
ον Ane ¢ Γ᾿ Ἔα ee a. or oh Sie eiel’s ia th ΓΝ ἜΣΧΕ 





7 


THE 


SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


1. Apostolic Address and Greeting. 


Cuapter I. 1-2. 


Pavt, an Apostle of Jesus Christ [Christ Jesus]' by the will of God, and Timothy 
our [the] brother unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints 


2 which are in all Achaia. 
the Lord Jesus Christ. 


Grace be to you and peace, from God our Father, and from 


1Ver. 1.—The collocation of the words: Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ has better authority in its favor here than it has in 1 Cor. i. 1, 
but Paul appears uniformly tu have put Χριστοῦ before Ἰησοῦ immediately after ἀπόστολος or δοῦλος, in accordance with: 
the natural train of thought: the messenger of the Messiah, the divinely commissioned King. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Comp. on 1 Cor. i. 1 ff. The salutation in vs. 
2 is precisely like that in the former Epistle. 
The address in vs. 1 is briefer: ἀπόστολος is 
without κλητός, and ἐκκλεσία with only a local 
definition. Timothy has the same position which 
Sosthenes had there, and it is evident that he 
must have returned to the Apostle from his mis- 
sion to Corinth (1 Gor. iv. 17; xvi. 10f. Comp. 
Introd.). The persons addressed are designated 
with more particularity than in 1 Cor. i. 2, as 
‘all the saints which are in all Achaia.”” From 
their being addressed as τοῖς ἁγίοις, and not as 
ἐκκλησίαι (as in Gal. ii. 2, comp. Eph. i. 1) it does 
not necessarily follow that they were only iso- 
lated individuals, or small companies without a 
distinct ecclesiastical organization, And yet we 
should have no greater certainty in maintaining 
the contrary. [Alford suggests that the word 
“saints”’ is used rather than ‘‘ churches” as in 
Gal. i. 2, because the matters principally to be 
discussed in the Epistle concerned only the Co- 
rinthians as a church, and those living in the 
province generally merely as individual saints]. 
In either case they were all connected with the 
Church of Corinth as the mother-church. With 
respect to the name Achaia, the common usage 
of the time as it is seen in Acts xix. 21, and 
especially the phrase ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ’Ayaia, abun- 


dantly warrants us in assuming: that it is here: 
used in its most extensive meaning.*—Moreover, 
this expression does not justify us in concluding 
(with Neander) that our Epistle was encyclical 
in its object, for the entire scope of its contents 
would be opposed to such a view, and we should 
be obliged to infer that all Christians through- 
out the province [including those at Athens, 
Cenchree, and perhaps Sicyon, Argos, etc. ] 
were involved in the censures directed against 
the mother-church (comp. Osiander, Introd. 3 3), 


DOCTRINAL AND. ETHICAL. 
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


(See on 1 Cor: i. 1-3). 





* [At some time between the conquest of Greece by the 
Romans and the reign of Augustus (B. C. 169-147), the whole: 
region south of Thessaly and Epirus, nearly co-extensive with: 
the modern kingdom of Greece, became a single province of 
the Empire under the name of Achaia. After the strong: 
expression of the pro-cunsul’s,. and the Gentiles’ disapproba- 
tion of the accusations made against Paul (Acts xviii.), he 
appears to have labored: freely and with such success in the 
whole province of Achaia,.that a number of churches were 
established in it (comp..1 Thess.i.8; 2 Thess. 1. 4). Smirn’s 
Dict. art. Achaia, ConyB: AND Howson, vol. 1, p. 416, chap. 
xii. A. R. Fausset in Port. Com., vol. 2,p-316. Hf, however, 
we recollect the general contents and aim of this Epistle, we 
may well doubt (with Osiander) whether we ought not here 
to take the word Achaia in the narrower sense which it 
sometimes even then bore and which is almost certain in 1 
Cor. xvi. 15 (comp. Acts xviii. 1.)] 9 


10 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


“--..............................................“...ττὔὁοδὃὸὖὺΣὦΣ.α.ὕ.ὕὔὕὔῴψν ΔΤ τδτδὸτΤτΤέΤΤἕΠ ρ ;Ὰ “...,,΄Γ,Π-΄ῤ-..-  -λ8Ῥ3)ϑο:- 





INTRODUCTION. 


2. Thanks for Divine consolations under his tribulations ; the blessings conferred upon him thereby for 
the better discharge of his official duties, and the fellowship between him and 
his readers (vv. 3-11). 


Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and 
the God of all comfort; Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able 
to comfort them which are in any trouble by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are 
comforted of God. For as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, so our consolation 
[comfort] also aboundeth by Christ. And whether we be afilicted, τὲ 7s for your con- 
solation [comfort] and salvation, [or whether we be comforted, it 7s for your comfort] 
which is effectual in the enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer: [om. 
or whether we be comforted, it is for your consolation and salvation]: and our hope 
of you is steadfast,’ knowing that as* ye are partakers of the sufferings, so shall ye be 
[are ye] also of the consolation [comfort]. For we would not, brethren, have you ig- 
norant of* our trouble which came to us‘ in Asia,that we were pressed out of measure,® 
above strength, insomuch that we despaired even of life. But we [ourselves] had the 
sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which 
raiseth the dead:' Who delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver :* in whom 
we trust that he will yet deliver us: ye also helping together by prayer for us, that 
for the gift bestowed upon us by the means of many persons thanks may be given by 
many on our behalf.” 


oon H CO 


- Oo ῷ coal 


pot et 


1 Ver. 7.—The Rec. altogether without authority makes καὶ ἡ ἐλπις ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν follow immediately the second mapaxaA, 
καὶ σωτηρίας. Bengel, Griesbach and Meyer let τῆς ἐνεργ.---ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν follow immediately after the second παρακλήσεως. 
Lachmann and Tischendorf, (whom Osiander follows) place τῆς ἐνεργουμένης--οὑπὲρ ὑμῶν directly after the first παρακλ. Kat 
σωτηρίας, though Lachmann includes [kai σωτηρίας] in brackets as suspected. See exeget. notes. [The reading of the 
Kec. has generally been ascribed to Erasmus who, in his 2nd edit. of the Greek Test., must have obtained it by combining 
several Latin versions with some Greek MSS., since no single Greek MS. has been found which gives exactly his reading. 
Having been received from him by Beza (in his 3rd, 4th and 5th editions), and by the Elzevir, it passed into our early Ger- 
man and English versions. Of course, it has no documentary authority. The reading of Bengel and QGriesbach was that 
which Erasnius and Beza had adopted in their first editions, and it is sustained by A. C. M. Sinait., and other less important 
uncial MSS. together with the Syr., Copt., Aeth., Arm., anda number of the Vulg. and Old Italic versions. The reading 
of Lachmann and Tischendorf (7th ed.) has been adopted by de Wette, Olshausen, Bloomfield, Alford, Osiander, Conybeare, 
Wordsworth, Stanley and Hodge, and is sustained by B. D. E. F. G. K. and L., by numerous cursives, the Syro-Phylox., and 
the Gothic versions, and by Chrysost., Theodt., Damasc., Theophyl., cum. (though some of these insert καὶ σωτηρίας before 
τῆς ἐνεργουμένς, etc.). Meyer thinks that Griesbach’s was the original form of the text, but that the copyist easily passed 
from the first to the second παρακλῆσεως, omitting all between them, and that an emendation was then attempted by intro- 
ducing the omitted words later in the sentence. Bloomfield’s conjecture is much more natural and scientific, viz., that 
Lachmann’s reading being more difficult was more likely to have been amended, to avoid the interruption of the antithe- 
sis between ἔιτε θλιβομεθα, εἰσ and ἔιτε παρακαλούμεθα, etc., by the clause καὶ ἢ ἐλπὶς---ὁ μῶν, and that those who transposed 
the clause τῆς ἐνεργ.---πάσχομεν, make the Apostle absurdly assert that his readers would be consoled by enduring the same 
sufferings with himself, instead of saying that his affliction and consolation were calculated to profitthem. Stanley sug- 
gests, that in this whole section the force of the thoughts depends on rendering παρακαλεῖν, and its derivatives, by the same 
corresponding words in English. We, therefore, use the word “comfort” throughout]. 

2 Ver. 7.—The ὥσπερ of the Rec. is not as well sustained [88 ὡς, which has in its favor A. B. Ο. Ὁ. E. Sinait., e¢ αἷ., and as 
Tisch. observes: “ὥσπερ substitutum videtur ut planius esset cum ἔστε, etc., non arctius cum κοινωνοὶ conjungendum esse.’?). 

8 Ver. 8.—For the first ὑπὲρ Lachm, reads περὶ. and he is sustained by A. Ο. D. BE. F. G. Sinait., e¢ al., and followed by 
Meyer and Stanley, but Tischendorf, Bloomfield, Wordsworth and Alford retain ὑπὲρ as the more difficult reading. [See 
Webster’s Synt.and Synn. of the Gr. Test.. p. 172). 

4 Ver. 8.—Lachm., following the preponderance of authorities, throws out ἡμῖν from the text. [It is rejected as a su-~ 
perfluous gloss to γενομένης by Meyer and Alford, Wordsworth and Stanley according to A. B. CO. Ὁ. F. G. and Sinait., but it 
is retained by Tischendorf and Bloomfield, and is suspected by Griesbach]. 

5 Ver. 8.—On the anthority of A. B. C. [Sinait.], et al., Lachmann puts ὑπὲρ (some put παρὰ) δύναμιν before ἐβαρήθημεν. 
{Alford and Stanley (as usual) agree with Lachm., but Tischendorf, Bloomfield and Wordsworth, sustained by a few uncials 
and a number of the best versions and fathers, agree with the Receptus]. 

© Ver. 10.—B. ©. {and Sinait.] have καὶ ῥύσεται. Others omitit. It is probably achange of the ῥύεται by a mistake for 
the form in the following clause, and then it would naturally be thrown out as superfluous, or be left out through oversi hy 
[Tisch.. Meyer, Bloomf. and Words. have καὶ ῥύεται, Lachm. and Stanley have καὶ ῥύσεται, but in brackets: and Alfor 
‘contends that these last words would not be superfluous, sincs they would look “to the immediate future, while καί € 
ῥύσεται would look to the continuance of help in distant and uncertain time ¥; ; 

1 Ver. 11,—-The Var. ὑμῶν is not sufficiently sustained, {and yet itis adopted by Tischendorf (7th ed.) and Reiche, and 
‘bas the authority of the revised Vat., the Sinait., Clarom. (2d cor.), et al., and no small support of versions and Fathers]. , 





CHAP. I. 3-11. 


11 





EXEGETICAL AND ORITICAL. 


This ascription of praise and thanksgiving dif- 
fers from others of a different character (Eph. i. 3 
ff.; 1 Pet. i. 8 ff.), in those respects in which our 
Epistle is peculiar. It gives special prominence 
to what was personal to the writer, and what per- 
tained to his individual fellowship with his rea- 
ders. We are not, however, to seek in it for a di- 
rect and studied design to gain the esteem of his 
opponents, by excusing his delay in coming to Co- 
rinth by way of captatio benevolentiz, or to bring 
his readers to see that the love which formerly 
burned in his heart was still glowing there. It 
was rather the spontaneous effusion of a father’s 
love toward achurch which he had been compelled 
so severely toreprove, and which hestill felt bound 
to address with some severity; and an earnest ef- 
fort to awaken in them a hearty reciprocation of 
his affection. Itis, however, possible that it con- 
tains an incidental and indirect parrying of the 
insinuation that his sufferings might be an indi- 
cation of the divine displeasure (Osiander). 

Ver. 3 a. Blessed be the Godand Father 
of our Lord Jesus Christ.—The meaning of 
the word Blessed (εὐλογητός) is not: God is worthy 
of praise, with ἐστίν understood, but: Blessed, or 
Praised be God, with εἴη understood. The word 
is not unfrequently used in the Sept. asa render- 
ing for J)". The God and Father signifies, He 


who is both God and Father (1 Cor. xv. 24). Tov 
κυρίου ἡμῶν, etc., is governed by πατῇρ alone, al- 
though in other passages the dependence of Christ 
the Lord upon ὁ ϑεός is obviously expressed (Comp 
Eph. i. 17; John xx. 17).—In addition to the more 
general idea in ὁ ϑεός (the God), the Apostle 
wished to remind them, as in Eph. i. 3, and Rom. 
xv. 6, of the more special source of that fellowship 
which exists between God and believers (v. 2). 
Neander: ‘It is quite in accordance with Paul’s 
usual manner to express, first God’s general rela- 
tion to the religious spirit by the name of ὁ ϑεός, 
and then the special relation in which God stands 
to the Christian by the phrase, The Father of our 
Lord.” This is followed bya more detailed specifi- 
cation of what God had done, and what he had him- 
self experienced: the Father of mercies, and 
the God of all comfort (ver.36). These geni- 
tives (τῶν οἰκτ. and πάσης παρακ.) intimate that God 
was the source from which both the mercies and 
every comfort must proceed, or, more probably, we 
have in οἰκτιρμῶν (asin Rom. xii. 1, wherethe word 
is equivalent to ὩΣ.) the genitive of the attri- 


bute, as in κύριος τῆς δόξης (1 Cor. ii. 8), equiva- 
lent to ὁ πατὴρ οἱκτίρμων, and in πάσης παρακλήσεως 
the genitive of the effect. From the mercies pro- 
ceeds the comfort, inasmuch as he becomes, of 
course, the God of all comfort by being the Father 
of mercies.—In such @ connection (comp. y. 4) 
παράκλησις signifies that kind, tranquilizing, ani- 
mating encouragement one needs in the midst of 
sufferings (comp. the use of rapaxaAév in Isa. xl. 
1, as the rendering of 773, and also in chap. vii. 


6).—This consolation was procured by the Holy 
Spirit’s influence upon the heart by means of the 
word of God, special providences (deliverances, 
etc.) and human ministrations (comp. ch. vii. 6).— 
[We here meet with an application to God in gen- 
eral of the idea of the ναράκλησις, which in John’s 





writings is commonly ascribed to Christ and te 
the Holy Spirit. The whole work of the Paraclete 
or Comforter (Consoler) is accomplished by an 
application of the entire work and consequences 
of redemption to the believer. Comp. Stanley; 
also Wordsworth on Jno. xiv. 16; and Braun on 
1 Jno. ii.1; Hare onthe Comforter]. Its extent 
and copiousness is expressed by πάσης (all), since 
it is thus related to all kinds and degrees of trou- 
ble (v. 4). What he here ascribes to God in gen- 
eral he asserts in vy. 4, that he and his fellow-la- 
borers had enjoyed not only at special seasons, but 
at all times. Who is comforting us in all 
our afflictions (ver. 4a). The present who is 
comforting implies especially that these consola- 
tions were repeated and continued without inter- 
ruption. In ἡμᾶς he referred more particularly 
to himself, but not to the exclusion of his com- 
panions in labor and suffering, and certainly he 
meant more than would have been implied by the 
use of the first person singular (comp Meyer and 
de Wette). The preposition ἐπί introduces either 
the things by means of which (—év), or (better), 
those with respect to which he was consoled [Jelf. 
Gr. Gram. 3 634,1la]. Afilictions of every kind, 
and as a whole (comp. ϑλῖψς in 1 Cor. vii. 28), are 
included under the phrase, in all our afflictions. He 
thus recognizes what had been the divine aimin 
conducting him through such an experience. ΑΒ 
he had been made to feel his need of divine con- 
solations, so the enjoyment of those consolations 
was of great benefit to him; that we may be 
able to comfort those who are in any afflic- 
tion by the comfort wherewith we our- 
selves are comforted by God (ver. 44).—The 
idea is not merely that others would be encour- 
aged by the example of*patience and constancy 
which those divine consolations had enabled him 
to present, but rather that his experience had 
qualified him to assist those who were in any kind 
of trouble, by imparting to them the same consola- 
tions. He could now point them to the answers 
which his own prayers had received, to the rational 
foundation of a Christian’s confidence and hopes, 
and to the promises and tender assurances God 
had given to His people. Neander: ‘ There was, 
in fact, no way of making a deeper impression 
upon others than by testifying to them in this man- 
ner what he had realized in his actual experience.” 
In ἧς we have a remarkable instance of relative at- 
traction, the irregularity of which can be obviated 
only by referring to the construction of παρακαλεῖν 
παράκλῃσιν (see Winer’s Idioms, ὃ 14,1, p. 136). 
We havea similar instance in Eph. iv. 1 (and i. 7, 
according to the readings of Lachm. and Griesb.). 

Ver. 5. For as the sufferings of Christ 
abound toward us, even so through Christ 
our consolation also abounds. —A reason is 
here assigned for what had been asserted in the 
preceding verse (57: being equivalent to γάρ). But 
to what part of v. 4 does this reason refer? Osi- 
ander regards it as an explanation of the way in 
which it is said in the final sentence that he had 
been qualified to console others in their suffer- 
ings. But no reference is made to this until the 
sixth verse. The true answer probably is, that 
the Apostle is here endeavoring to place ina 
clearer light the main thought which he had 
brought out in γ. 4 with respect to his experience 
of divine consolation, and which he kad expressed 
in the two phrases, who is comforting, and wherer 


12 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





with we are comforted by God, and that thus he was 
naturally led back to the thanksgiving he had of- 
fered in the third verse. He describes the degree 
of consolation as commensurate with the distress. 
The distress itself he proceeds more particularly 
to characterize as the sufferings of Christ. This 
expression may mean sufferings endured either 
for Christ’s sake, or by Christ. Himself, or by 
Christ in His members. The words themselves 
will hardly bear the first of these interpretations: 
the idea conveyed in the third is not very clearly 
consistent with the doctrine of the New Testa- 
ment; and we may regard the second as essen- 
tially correct. Those sufferings of Christ which 
are shared by His servants, and in which they 
may have fellowship with Him (Phil. iii. 10; Col. 
i. 24, etc.; Matth. xx. 22; Heb. xiii. 13; 1 Pet. 
iv. 13), are such as they endure while struggling 
with the world and its rulers, and such as are 
inflicted on them for the cause of God (for right- 
eousness’ sake). ‘* Whoever suffers.such things 
endures the same kind of evils: with, those which 
Christ underwent” (Meyer), The idea of these 
sufferings of Christ is further extended by Ne- 
ander: ‘‘ We must concede that all those suffer- 
ings which the believer endures in the spirit 
of Christ, of whatever nature they may be, may 
very properly be looked upon as.a part of his 
following of Christ.”—To. these sufferings the 
consolation through Christ is said to correspond. 
Those who enter into the fellowship of Christ’s 
sufferings will experience His sympathy, and 
through this a degree of consolation proportioned 
to their sufferings. Such as suffer with Christ 
(Rom. viii. 17), will receive divine consolation 
through Christ. Both are said to overflow {(περισ- 
σεύει), to be always realized in abundance. This, 
however, does not imply that the measure of these 
sufferings was greater than that which Christ en- 
dured (analogous to the ‘greater works” men- 
tioned in John xiv. 12). The depth and delicacy 
of the Apostle’s piety are admirably exhibited in 
his mention of divine consolations, at the same 
time and with an equal degree of prominence. 
Comp. Bengel: [‘‘ The words and their order are 
sweetly interchanged: παϑήματα" παράκλησις, suf- 
ferings ; consolation—the former are numerous ; 
the latter is but one, and yet exceeds the former. 
In this very Epistle, as compared with the former, 
is shed forth a far greater amount of consolation 
for the Corinthians, and of course the whole inner 
man was more perfectly renewed, and increased 
more and more”’]. 

Ver. θα. But whether we are afflicted, itis 
for your comfort andsalvation, or whether 
we are comforted it is for your comfort ;— 
The Apostle now proceeds toapply what he had just 
said tothose whom he was addressing. His afflic- 
tions and his consolations would be alike produc- 
tive of good in their behalf. In the two inferential 
or minor propositions of the sixth verse, the verb 
of the preceding sentence must be supplied, or 
briefly : ‘this was,” etc. Ὕπέρ has here the sense 
of: for the advantage, for the interest, in behalf of, of 
any one—w hich iseffectual in the enduring 
of the same sufferings which we also suffer 
(ver. 6 6.).—Irrespective of the different readings 
of this passage, we may at once mention as settled 

oints: 1. That τῆς ἐνεργουμένης (which are effectual) 
1s to be construed, as in every other part of Paul's 
writings, 88 an active and nota passive partici- 





ple (comp. Rom. vii. 5; Gal. v. 6; Eph. iii. 20; 
Col. 1.29; 1 Thess. ii. 13 ; 2 Thess. ii. 7). 2. That 
εἰδότες (knowing) refers to the knowledge which 
Paul, not the Corinthians, possessed. 3. That τῶν 
αὐτων (the same) does not imply that their sufferings 
were literally the same, as if he were speaking 
merely of their sympathy; for καὶ ἡμεῖς (we also) 
would be directly opposed to such an interpreta- 
tion, and ἐν ὑπομονῇ (in the enduring) would hardly 
seem appropriate to it. The words imply simply 
that their sufferings were of a kind similar to the 
sufferings of Christ (v.5). If we receive the strongly 
attested reading which Lachmann and Tischendorf 
have preferred, and especially if we construe τῆς 
ἐνεργουμένης with a passive signification, the parti- 
cipial sentence will present us with the explana- 
tcry definition of the minor term of the previous 
proposition which is so much needed, and without 
which that proposition seems rather strange and 
indeterminate with respect to the part of y. 4 to 
which it should be applied. In this case also εἰδότες 
is connected very appropriately, and without an 
anacoluthon with the παρακαλούμεϑα of v. 4 which 
is to be supplied before εἰδότες here; and finally, 
the several members of the sentence appear to pos- 
sessa more perfect congruity, inasmuch as the first 
acquires a more extensive definition by means of 
τῆς ἐνεργουμένης, etc., and the second by means of 
εἰδότες, etc. These advantages, however, are to 
some extent only apparent ; since the connection 
of εἰδότες with παρακαλουμεϑα cannot be logically 
justified (since it could be followed only by ὅτι). 
On the other hand, its connection with καὶ ἡ ἐλπίς 
ἡμῶν βεβαία would be grammatically natural 
(comp. Meyer) and logically correct. For the 
ἐλπίς refers here not to its ultimate object, 7. e., 
the eternal glory, but to the more immediate con- 
solation which he anticipated, when they should 
enter upon the same kind of sufferings with those 
he was enduring, and which he was assured they 
would endure with ὑπομονῇ, i. e., with steadfast- 
ness and perseverance (comp. Rom. vy. 3).—By 
accepting the reading which Bengel, Griesbach 
and Meyer have defended, and which is sustained 
by equally strong documentary and more pro- 
bable internal evidence, we shvuld have in τῆς 
ὑπὲρ τῆς ὑμῶν παρακλήσεως καὶ σωτηρίας, a resump- 
tion of the subject of the design of his afflictions 
in v. 4 (εἰς τὸ divact., ete., i. 6.}, ‘* that we may 
be instrumental in promoting your consolation 
and salvation.” The reference here would there- 
fore be to the Apostle’s instrumentality in this 
respect, and to his qualification therefor by an 
experience of suffering. Certainly such a view 
has more in its favor than that which maintains 
that Paul’s afflictions were beneficial only to the 
degree in which they promoted the cause of that 
Gospel on which their whole consolation and 
salvation depended. The meaning might pos- 
sibly be that the Apostle’s afflictions were of 
advantage to the Corinthians, on the ground that 
they made a profitable use of them, inasmuch as 
they might be encouraged and strengthened, by 
his example of faith and steadfastness, to perse- 
vere like him unto final salvation. Or, with still 
greater simplicity, we may suppose that the Corin- 
thians would be sustained under their afflictions, 
for the Gospel’s sake, by seeing that their spiri- 
tual father had endured similar afflictions; and 
hence by seeing that these were so far from indi- 
cating that God was displeased with them, they 


CHAP. I. 3-11. 


18 





rather implied that they were truly the Lord’s 
servants, and belonged to Him whom the world 
hated. This last, we believe, will be found the 
most correct interpretation of this passage. 
That which was so effectual for their consolation 
was equally effectual for their salyation, inasmuch 
as it strengthened them for that endurance to 
which the promise of salvation was annexed 
(Matth. xxiv. 18; comp. Jas. i. 12). In the 
second member of the sentence καὶ σωτηρίας does 
not probably belong to the original text. Were 


it genuine we should be thereby informed that | 


this salvation also was, when the Apostle wrote, 
working in the endurance of sufferings, because 
the hope of salvation gave them power to perse- 
vere under them. We may explainitis for your 
comfort—sither vy a reference to ver. 4, and 
making it allude to the consoling influence of the 
Apostle, or by giving it a meaning like that of the 
first member of the sentence, w/z., that the Corin- 
thians were sustained and encouraged, in the midst 
of their sufferings, by seeing how the Apostle 
was comforted under similar sufferings.—In 
the sentence: And our hope of you is 
steadfast, the words, of ‘you belong not exclu- 
sively either to the subject or to the predicate, 
but to bothof them. In ver. 7 the word partakers 
must imply not merely a sympathy with, but an 
actual participation in, the outward (objective) 
sufferings. It relates however not to Christ (as 


in-Phil. iii. 10) nor to believers in general, but | 


as the connection shows, to the Apostle ¢imself. 
They were his companions, not only in suffering, 
but in consolation. Neanpeer: ‘If the Apostle 
is here speaking of what is essential to Christian 
fellowship, he could hardly have presumed, that 
the great body of the congregation were in the 
exercise of it; but he must have spoken of what 
ought to be, and of what he would fain hope was, 
the fact, rather than of what he knew to be a 
reality.” 

Vers. 8-11. Particular peril through which 
he had passed.i—The Apostle had spoken in 
the previous verses of his trials and consola- 
tions only in general terms; he now pro- 
ceeds to give them some details (yaa) with refer- 
ence to his most recent experience. [STANLEY: 
“ΤῊ moment he begins to address the Corin- 
thians (directly), two feelings arise in his mind, 
and cross each other in almost equal proportions. 
The first is an overwhelming sense of gratitude 
for his deliverance from his distress; and the 
second is the keen sense which breathes through 
both the Epistles, but especially through the 
Second, of his unity of heart and soul with his 
Corinthian converts. This identity of feeling 
between the Apostle and them, must be borne in 
mind throughout. It accounts fora large portion 
of the peculiarities of the Apostle’s style; the 
double self which creates as it were a double 
current of feeling and thought, now taking the 
form of passionate sympathy, now of anxiety, 
now of caution and prudence; the plural number 
which he employs in this Epistle even more fre- 
quently than elsewhere for himself, asif including 
his readers also.” ] For we would not have 
you ignorant: comp. on 1 Cor. x. 1; as in IL. 
Thess, ii. 1, ὑπέρ has here the sense of : concerning, 
or with respect to. The more fluent περί was sub- 
stituted as a correction at an early period and is 


found even in A.C D. [Sinait.] etal. The par- 
ticular affliction which the Apostle had in view, 
cannot now be determined. I'he context (ver. 4f.) 
is decidedly against any reference of these words 
to some severe sickness (Ruckert, Bisping, [Al- 
ford, Stanley]). The tumult raised by Deme- 
trius at Ephesus produced no immediate danger 
to his person, inasmuch as he was persuaded by 
his friends not to appear in public (Acts xix. 30). 
Weare informed of no serious disturbances before 
or after that event. The general expression, in 
Asia (1 Cor. xvi. 19), seems to favor a reference 
to some incident in another place. The most 
probable suggestion is that he was alluding to the 
efforts of his many adversaries to lay wait for 
and ensnare him (1 Cor. xvi. 9). The details had 
probably been made known to the Corinthians by 
oral accounts (through Titus). The point on which 
he here insists, and which he presents in strong 
terms, is the greatness of his affliction. The es- 
sential idea is contained in the phrase, we 
were pressed out of measure beyond 
strength. The word βαρεῖσϑαι includes within 
its meaning tne feeling of oppression and distress 
produced by any kind of affliction and persecu- 
tion (comp. chap. xi. 26). The specifications 
contained in the expressions, out of measure, and 
beyond strength, may either be codrdinated so that 
the first of them shall present the objective side 
of the affair, 7. 6., the exceedingly great load 
which weighs one down out of all measure; and 
the latter the subjective side, ἡ. e., that which 
surpasses all his power of endurance; or the first 
of these may be taken as a more particular defi- 
nition either of ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, as is intimated by 
the position of the phrase before ἐβαρήϑημεν in 
some eopies (according to Lachmann’s reading, 
sustained by A. B. C. [Sinait] et al.), or of ἐβαρ- 





ἤϑημεν ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, as certainly deserves the 
preference if the words be arranged according to 
the well sustained ordinary reading. The omis- 
sion of the conjunction (asyndeton) is no argu- 
ment against the codrdination of the phrases, for 
we may (with Osiander) regard the second as a 
climactic expression, g. d., ‘‘an exceedingly great 
burden, yea, surpassing all my power of endur- 
ance.” Such an expression would not necessarily 
be in conflict with 1 Cor. x. 18 (comp. xii. 9). 
In saying: despaired of life, the Apostle meant 
that he was completely at his wits’ end, and 
that he saw no way by which his life could be 
saved. It is only in another and an absolute 
sense that he denies, in chap. iv. 8, that he was 
ever in despair. He intensifies the same idea in 
ver. 9, ina positive form and in an independent sen- 
tence. ᾿Αλλὰ indicates a negative: not only saw 
we no method by which our lives could be saved, 
but we had in our own hearts the conviction that 
we had been condemned to death; 7. ¢., we were 
satisfied that the time had come when we were 
to die. ᾿Απόκριμα is not precisely equivalent to 
κατάκριμα (ἃ sentence of death), but it signifies an 
authoritative sentence, a decree, or an answer [the 
substance of the decision, the ψῆφον (Chrys.) the 
| vote or judgment which our affairs spoke forth]. 
To the question whether we should escape death, 
we could ourselves return nothing but a negative 
answer. The idea expressed in αὐτοὶ ἐν ἑαυτῦις 
is: no way of escape seemed open to us with our 
| lives, for we had adjudged our own selves to death, 





14 


and we were sure that nothing but death awaited 
us. Tov ϑανάτου denotes the object of the ἀπό- 
cpa. [The historical perfect ἐσχήκαμεν instead 
of the aorist ἔσχομεν, indicates, the continuance 
of the feeling: ‘‘ We have had” this consciousness, 
and have it still, as a permanent state of mind. 
comp. Wordsworth.] [0 is not precisely said in 
any part of the context, that this was a divine sen- 
tence; and yet the whole state of mind and the 
distinct expectation of death is probably so far 
to be referred to God, that it was the special 
design of God to produce the confidence mentioned 
in the next clause:—that we should not 
trustin men, &2.—The consciousness of perfect 
helplessness, and of an entire surrender to the 
power of death, took away every motive or trace 
of confidence in himself, in his own power or 
skill, and prepared him to throw himself exclu- 
sively upon the God who raiseth the 
dead.—The raising of the dead is here spoken 
of, because it is one of the highest exhibitions 
of divine power, and because it was something 
perpetually accomplished and characteristic of 
God, and not merely something to be done in 
future (comp. Rom. iv. 17). And yet the literal 
and general resurrection may have been indefi- 
nitely before the Apostle’s mind, as the model and 
pledge of a temporal deliverance from certain 
death (Osiander, Meyer). Such an epithet also 
very well corresponds with the subject on which 
he was about to discourse.— Who delivered us 
from so great a death (ver. 10).—The Apostle 
appeals to his own actual experience to prove 
that such a confidence was well grounded, and 
that God had been such a deliverer to him. Ty- 
λικούτος primarily signifies: so old or so young, 
and then: so great, [By its lengthened form it 
seems, as it were, to picture forth the continuity 
and accumulation of the extreme perils. Os1an- 
DER. ]. He conceived of himself as in such danger, 
that he was completely embraced by a deadly 
power, whose violence and terror is indicated by 
such aword. The reference is back to ver. 9. 
ῥύεσϑαι ἐκ he describes his forcible rescue from 
this power as if from the wrath of death. Kai 
ῥύεται implies by its present form that the machi- 
nations of his enemies had not yet ceased, and 
he implies that he expected simiiar perils in his 
future course; but from them all he was firmly 
convinced that God would continue to deliver him; 
—in whom also we trust (ἠλπίκαμεν 1 Cor. 
xv. 19; Johny. 45), that He will yet deliver 
us.—The perils here alluded to were similar to 
those recorded in Acts xx. 3. The enemies who 
thus pursued him with their wiles were the Asi- 
atic Jews, [whose influence and hatred against 
him as the greatest enemy of their national cus- 
toms, extended even to Macedonia (comp. Meyer) ], 
and never ceased until they had nearly accom- 
plished their purpose at Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 27 
ff).—For the sake of the great work he had been 
sent to accomplish, he was anxious to be delivered 
from these evils; and though he never shrunk 
from any peril he considered necessary to be 
encountered, he made use of every possible pre- 
caution to secure his safety (Acts xx. ὃ; xxi. 13). 
As in another Epistle he earnestly pleads with 
the Roman Christians that they would intercede 
in his behalf, with reference probably to these 
same perils; so in this place he exhibits his con- 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








In | 








fidence in the intercessions of his Corinthian 
brethren (ver. 11).— Ye also helping together 
by prayer for us.—His hope of future de- 
liverance was intimately connected with the as- 
surance that they would codperate with him and 
with others in prayer for that object. This may 
not have been precisely the sole condition on which 
he expected divine assistance, and yet he seems 
to have regarded it as the medium through which 
a real assistance might be expected (comp. Phil. 
1,19: Rom. xy. 80 ff). He had no doubt that God 
would be pleased with, and answer those inter- 
cessions, which were offered under a divine influ- 
ence with faith and love. The σύν has reference 
to an association in prayer, either with himself 
or with others in his behalf. The latter view is 
favored by the καὶ, (also) and is probably the cor- 
rect one, since the relation to the Apostle is 
pointed out rather by ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, which cannot be 
drawn into connection with δεῆσει by a hyperba- 
ton without a needless harshuess of construction. 
[Curysostom: ‘He neither ascribes the whole of 
the good work to them, lest he should lift them 
up, nor yet deprives them of all share in it, that 
he might encourage them and animate their zeal, 
and bring them together one to another.’’] 
Having thus given prominence to this aspect 
of the fellowship between him and the Corinthians, 
he now directs their attention to the ultimate de- 
sign of God in delivering him by such means:— 
that thanks may be given, &c.—The χάρισμα, 
the deliverance so graciously bestowed by God, 
ought to be followed by thanksgiving. Evyap- 
ἐστηθῇ may indeed be translated: to get thanks 
(comp. Passow and de Wette). With τὸ εἰς ἡμᾶς, 
(in the sense of: what is for our part), corresponds 
ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν: for our sake, or for our good, inasmuch 
as the payment of a debt of gratitude will result 
in further bencfits. But what would then be the 





| sense of ἐκ πολλῶν προσώπων and διὰ πολλῶνϑ᾽ Do 


both of them refer to persons, or is the second 
to be taken as a neuter in the sense of: prolize, 
with many words? 'This last would seem very 


| feeble and unsuitable to the intimate relation of 


the one phrase to the other. But neither can ἐκ 
πολλῶν προσώπων signify: from many considera- 
tions, nor in many respects. There remain, how- 
ever, several ways in which the words may be 
connected: 1. ’Ex πολλῶν προσώπων may be joined 
with τὸ--- χάρισμα, under the supposition of a hy- 
perbaton equivalent to τὸ ἐκ, and διὰ πολλῶν may 
be joined with εὐχαριστηϑῇ [g. d. that for the 
gift bestowed upon us by many persons, thanks 
may be rendered through many on our behalf]. 
In this case, διὰ would not have precisely the 
same meaning as ὑπό, but those rendering thanks 
would be looked upon as representatives or organs 
of the Apostle.—OsIANDER. 2. Ἔκ πολλῶν προσ- 
ὦπων may be joined with εὐχαριστηϑῇ and διὰ 
πολλῶν with χάρισμὰ, [q. d. that for the gift be- 
stowed upon us through many, thanks may be 
rendered by many persons on our behalf]. In 
this case the want of the article (rd διὰ) wonld 
certainly be remarkable, but would not be incon- 
sistent with the analogy of other places. 8. Both 
may be connected with εὑρ χαριστηϑῇ, but in differ- 
ent relations. The same persons may be under- 
stood as referred to in both phrases, but in ἐκ 
πολλῶν προσώπῶν they are regarded as the per- — 
sons from whom the thanksgiving proceeds, and 


CHAP I. 8-11. 


— 


in διὰ πολλῶν they are spoken of as the medium 
or occasion for the thanksgiving, because the de- 
liverance had been effected through their inter- 
cessions (Meyer), [g. d. that for the gift bestowed 
upon us, thanks may be rendered through many, 
by many persons on our behalf]. If we adopt 
this last interpretation, it cannot but seem 
desirable, that at least a καὶ had been thrown in 
before διὰ πολλῶν, for without it the whole ex- 
pression appears too elliptical and unmeaning. 
On the whole we prefer the second method, which 
connects διὰ πολλῶν with τὸ χάρισμα even without 
the article, to the always harsh hyperbaton 
which the first method renders necessary. <Ac- 
cording to later usage, πρόσωπον had the sense of: 
person; properly, the man, qguatenus aliquam 
personam obtinet. Here it means: gui partes των 
εὐχαριστούντων agunt (Meyer). [The delicacy 
and beauty of the prominent and related phrases: 
ἐκ πολλῶν, and did πολλῶν, εἰς ἡμᾶς and ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, 
χάρισμα and εὐχαριστηϑῇ, should not be overlooked 
(Osiander). On all these deliverances and thanks- 
givings the Apostle says he had set and was set- 
ting his hope (7Arixauev, the perfect expressing 
the continuance and permanence of the ἐλπίς, 
and εἰς marking the direction of the hope, with 
perhaps some faint (locative) notion of union or 
communion with the object of it). Hllicott on I 
Tim. iv. 10.] 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


Christians enjoy a threefold fellowship, in suf- 
fering, in consolation and in prayer; but this 
only proves that their life of faith and love is es- 
sentially one in Christ. Their life is derived 
from what Christ has suffered for them. This is 
the source of all their peace and strength, and this 
brings them into affectionate communion with 
him, so that his.cause becomes their own. Just 
as he took on himself the load of their guilt, they 
appropriate to themselves the cause of righteous- 
ness, of God and of his kingdom for which he 
contended and suffered, and share in all his strug- 
gles and sufferings. It is their highest joy and 
glory to endure reproach and persecution for his 
name’s sake. And as this fellowship and unity 
with him is common to them all, the suffering of 
any one of them for the common cause is shared 
also by each: they all wrestle in prayer for him, 
and they all become sharers in his consolation 
and joy. They will look upon the assistance 
voucnsafed to him as a gracious answer to their 
united intercessions, and of course they will unite 
with him in thankful ascriptions of praise. 

There is a wonderful power in this fellowship. 
It is not merely the highest realization and 
brightest exhibition of God’s great scheme of 
mercy, but it glorifies his power by binding hea- 
ven and earth in one great communion. What- 
ever sufferings are encountered within the Chris- 
tian fold, they must necessarily tend to the com- 
mon welfare. Mighty results, too, will be accom- 
plished in answer to their united prayers, yea, 
these do for them ‘‘ exceeding abundantly, above 
all that they can ask or think.” They may, while 
in the flesh, be not unfrequently weighed down 
by infirmities, be misunderstood by one another, 
and have grounds for mutual offence, but as long 








15 





as this threefold chain maintains its power, all real 
discord must finally be removed and all things 
must work together for their good. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


LurTuER, ver. 8: Paul sometimes exhibits ἃ cou- 
rage which fears nothing, and despises all danger 
and agony. But, again, we find this same man, 
so full of the Holy Ghost, speaking and acting as 
if he had no spirit at all. The same faith which 
at one time is gi ταῦ and strong, and full of confi- 
dence and joy, ts at another small and feeble.— 
Such are the changes which occur in the life of 
all the saints, that all may learn to trust not in 
themselves, but in God alone. 

Menanctuon, Vv. 3,4: Three things make 
a theologian: oratio, meditatio, tentatio. 

STARKE, ver. 3, (SpeNER): The holiest part of 
divine worship is praise; and every Christian 
should have his heart so pervaded by recollec- 
tions of God’s merciful dealings, that his mouth 
shall be always pouring forth ascriptions of 
praise. Our heavenly Father has shown himself 
the God of all consolation by making all consola- 
tion possible through his Son, and by sending 
forth the Holy Spirit as a Comforter, to offer us 
and bestow upon us Christ’s infinite righteous- 
ness.—God is not only merciful, but ‘‘the Father 
of mercies,” yea, mercy itself. Where, then, but 
in him can we find the best consolation when we 
are disappointed and in trouble? Never, then, 
should we be at a loss where to find true rest and 
all-sufficient consolations.—He has a comfort for 
every one of our numerous afilictions, and he 
only demands that we should appreciate the 
riches of his mercy, and freely use it for our con- 
solation.—Ver. 4: It has always been a part of 
the mystery of the cross to which man’s reason 
neyer gets reconciled, that God’s people should be 
harmless, and yet suffer persecution; and that 
they should do good, and yet suffer evil. But 
true light from above enables us to see that from 
the nature of things it could not be otherwise, 
and that the members must inevitably share the 
lot of the great Head.—We should never be satis- 
fied with a personal experience of support under 
trials. The cross was laid upon us, that we 
might learn also to sympathize with others, and 
show others by our example where to find the 
surest support in seasons of calamity. We should, 
therefore, observe what affords us consolation 
under our varied crosses, and carefully preserve 
it as we would a thoroughly tried medicine; for 
a time may come when we shall need it not. only 
for ourselves, but for others (Luke xxii. 32).— 
Though God is the original and proper Source of 
consolation, and tenderly sympathizes with his 
people, as a mother with her child (Isa. lxvi. 18), 
he frequently makes use of human instruments, 
especially faithful preachers and experienced 
Christians, for the comfort of such as are in dis- 
tress.—A good shepherd can receive nothing 
which he will not turn to the advantage of his 
flock.—The truest kind of consolation is that 
which not only sustains, but sanctifies the suf- 
ferer, and fills his heart and mouth with praise 
(Ps. exix. 32),—Ver.5: Itis in itself a great con- 
solation to know that our sufferings, are Christ’s 


16 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





sufferings, and that he regards as his own what- 
ever befalls his members.—Our cup of anguish is 
never more overflowing than our cup of consola- 
tion; for by a proper use of the means of grace 
our sufferings become proportionally tokens of 
our adoption and of our everlasting life (Rom. viii. 
16f. Phil. i. 19),—Vvy. 6, 7: When called to suf- 
fer severely, be comforted; for if you will look 
at those godly men who in ancient times were 
thrown into the furnace of tribulation, you will 
find that they were abundantly refreshed from 
above. Doubt not that the Lord will, in like 
manner, comfort and relieve you! If He counts 
us worthy to suffer for Christ’s sake, and enables 
us to obey Him and to be patient, we may be sure 
that He will sustain us and keep us unto the end. 
When we feel the burden pressing, relief is 
surely coming.—Vy. 8, 9: Heprincer: God often 
allows his people to suffer, but only to inflame and 
stimulate their faith and prayers. He lets them 
sink where no human arm can reach them, that 
when they are delivered they may praise Him 
and not themselves.—He who gives a great bless- 
ing may reasonably be relied upon for a smaller: 
if God has promised to raise the dead, we may 
surely trust Him in any temporal calamity (Isa. 
lix. 1).—Vv. 10, 11: If we have ‘twice and 
thrice been in trouble and found deliverance, let 
us take heart and courage for the future; for the 
same God yet lives, and will not leave us (1 Sam. 
xvii. 87; Deut.vii.18f.; Job v.19). He has, however, 
determined that his help shall be given in answer to 
prayer and intercession; not merely that we may 
learn our helplessness and dependence upon Him, 
but that our faith and love may be exercised, and 
we may be constrained to praise Him (Ps. 1. 15).— 
If we have known and sympathized with those 
who are in danger and distress, and have heartily 
interceded with God for them, we shall more 
heartily render thanks for their deliverance when 
our intercessions have been graciously answered. 

Bert. Bratz, Ver. 8: To know God as the God 
of the afflicted is called knowing him truly. Such 
ὃν name is appropriate to him in relation to such 
beings as ourselves, and he must bear it unless 
he is ashamed to be called our God. Great will 
be the joy of those who know Him in this charac- 
ter. Whoever has learned to praise Him has an 
all-sufficient treasure, and no one knows Him as 
he is revealed in his word, who has not learned 
to receive Him in the midst of distresses and 
temptations, These are the best laboratories in 
which God can dispense his grace, and even those 
who are without will soon experience the benefit 
of the new power with which we shall address 
them.—Ver. 5: Who would shrink from suffering, 
if he knew the proportionate comfort with which 
it is accompanied, and which he must lose, if he 
should be excused from bearing the cross? Alas! 
no wonder that so few ever taste the sweetness 
of the cross when so few know what it is to have 
the mind of Christ! If we have no consolation, 
we naturally struggle against our afflictions, but, 
until we are quiet and poor in spirit, how can we 
hear the inward voice of the Comforter ?—Vv. 6, 
ἡ. Τὸ is no small consolation to know that we 
share in the sufferings which come upon even 
the most approved of Christ’s members (1 Pet. v. 
9; Rev. i. 9).—Heavenly consolations abound 











awakened, who hunger and thirst after them, 
and who have been emptied of the world.—Vy, 
8, 9: The Lord sometimes allows his people te 
be so overwhelmed with sorrows, that created 
strength is completely overcome, and even those 
who have borne their burdens with vigor despair 
even of life; and yet so great are divine consola- 
tions that the cross loses all its heaviness, and 
divine strength is manifested in their weakness. 
Even the best of them are allowed to experience 
such trials inasmuch as these spring not from 
defect in purpose, but from infirmity of nature, 
that they may learn to build their hopes on God 
alone. When they have made shipwreck of all 
things, they are compelled to cling to Him as 
their last anchor, and to fix their thoughts 
upon no less a power, even in Him, than that 
which raises the dead.—Vy. 10, 11: As we suc- 
cessively enter upon our seasons of trial, we may 
say to one another, ‘‘It is my turn to-day; to- 
morrow it will be yours.” We should therefore 
pray one for another.—‘‘ Here is the faith and 
patience of the saints.” In such a community 
of loving fellowship, when any member receives 
a blessing, there are many to lift up their faces 
in thanksgiving; for every gift is common to 
them all.—Unbelief beholds only the divine curse 
upon every one who bears a cross, but true faith 
says of them, ‘‘It is well; it is well!” 

Rrecer, Ver. 3ff.: The names of God, as they 
are revealed in the Scriptures, are each an im- - 
pregnable fortress, where we may always rever- 
ently and confidently find refuge. The highest 
glories of the Deity become a comfort to us when 
they are brought down to our lowliness.—Our 
great High Priest was tempted in all points as 
we are, that he might have a true sympathy with 
his people. We need not think it strange, there- 
fore, that every one ordained to the evangelical 
priesthood should be conducted through every 
variety of condition, that he may have a fellow 
feeling for every class of his fellow men. Those 
only can impart comfort who are experienced in 
the ways of God, are familiar with the word of 
God, and are zealous for the honor of God. ΑἹ] 
others are sure to miss those very consolations 
which are most sustaining to those whom God’s 
sword has pierced.—Ver. 5; Troubles for Christ’s 
sake and for the gospel’s sake are Christ’s own 
sufferings. Our Lord looks upon them as in- 
flicted upon his own person, and as likening us 
to Himself.—Vv. 6, 7: To share in a brother’s 
suffering, brings us nearer to his heart, than any 
external intercourse.—Vv. 8, 9: We often flatter 
ourselves that we or others are of importance, 
and we promise ourselves and undertake much 
in reliance upon our strength, but when we be- 
gin to despair of life, all such flowerets and 
blossoms will fall away, and nothing will remain 
for us but the main trunk of a solid confidence in 
the living God. This will at such times only grow 
stronger, and we shall feel that it is all we need. 
—Vy. 10, 11: Many a path which begins in suf- 
fering and weeping terminates in thanksgivings 
and praises. The Lord grant us many such ex- 
periences, and if our way has already been 
darkened by sorrows, may its end be brightened 
with praises and everlasting life ! 

Hevusner, VER. 3: The God of the Bible is one 


to those whose consciences are thoroughly | who sympathizes as a father with his children, 


CHAP. I. 12-24, 


especially with those who are struggling with 
difficulties; and never will he allow them to want 
ample resources for consolation and strength. 
He will, however, convince them that he is the 
source of their truest life, and that every thing 
else is an illusion, and will leave us in a deeper 
night.—Ver. 4: Of all persons in the world, the 
minister of Christ should know what true conso- 
lation and a cheerful spirit is. Only those who 
have comfort can impart it. A theologus non ten- 
tatus, a minister without an experience of personal 
trials in religion, lacks an important qualification 
for his work. The more affliction, the more power 
he has; and the moment he enters the furnace of 
affliction, he has a virtual announcement from 
the Lord, that some great work is before him, 
and that God is preparing him for higher useful- 
ness. The soldier who is allowed to remain con- 
tinually around the camp-fire will never learn 
true bravery. —Vv. 6, 7: A minister’s afflictions 
deepen the impression of his discourses. The 
admonitions of a veteran general have a power 
which no young captain can ever have. 

W. F. Besser, Vers. 3, 4: The fruit of praise 
which is borne by our troubles is always sweet. 
Then, when the Redeemed of the Lord are com- 
forted, they praise the Lord for his goodness, eéc. 
Ps. cvii. 8, 15, 21, 31. Our merciful God and 
Father in Christ reserves his choicest comforts 
for his afflicted children. that with the tender- 
ness of a mother (Isa. Ixvi. 13) he may cause 
them to persevere under every sorrow and con- 
flict with sin and Satan, and, finally, that he 
may redeem them from the affliction itself.—Ver. 
5: The unity between Christ and his members is 
so perfect that the Apostle gives the name of 
Christ to the whole Church (1 Cor. xii. 12). The 
Church’s sufferings, then, are Christ’s in a dou- 
ble sense; for not only does it actually suffer as 
its Lord’s bride and companion, in opposition to 
a Christ-hating world (Rom. viii. 17; Gal. vi. 17; 
Phil. iii. 10), but Christ accepts of those suffer- 
ings as if they were literally his own. Many, 
indeed, experience distress and calamity who 
know nothing of Christian suffering, and of 
course nothing of Christian consolation, but the 
truly believing heart knows how to rejoice in the 








17 





Lord when all human consolation and jy are 
impossible (Phil. iv. 4).—Ver. 6: The fires of 
persecution which the devil kindles can never 
consume the church, but only confirm its faith 
and patience. God’s people have a common 
partnership both in consolations and sufferings, 
and in the Scriptures, as Hunnius says, they 
have a great storehouse of comfort, as they read 
how apostles and prophets found comfort for 
themselves, and learned how to comfort their 
companions in tribulation.—Ver. 9: The true end 
of faith is unwavering confidence in God, and 
when she has her own way all self-confidence 
must be renounced.—God’s almighty power and 
cordial love of life is shown in his raising even 
the dead to life (Rom. iv. 17; Heb. xi. 17). He 
will of course deliver his people when he pleases 
from death.—Ver. 11: The Spirit freely helpeth 
our infirmities when we pray, and especially 
when in the spirit of our common priesthood 
(Matt. xviii. 19) we intercede unitedly for those 
who particularly entreat us to plead for them.— 
So precious a thing is thanksgiving, and especi- 
ally united thanksgiving, that the Apostle 
makes the ultimate object of God in granting 
our prayers to be the obtaining of our thanks. 

[In this whole passage we have, I. A Chris- 
tian’s afjlictions.—These may be 1. very severe, 
‘‘above measure”’ (ver. 8), a ‘* sentence of death” 
(ver. 9), and ‘so great a death” (ver. 10). 2. 
They are always under divine allotment, (‘that 
we should nottrust,”’ efc., ver. 9). 11. Their bene- 
Jjicial uses, a8 a school of experience, for pro- 
mot.ng, 1. Comfort. This is, from God as their 
proper source (ver. 8), proportioned to the afflic- 
tion (ver. 5) and to increase our usefulness (vv. 
4,6); 2. Confidence, by throwing us upon our 
consciences (ver. 12), by driving us from ourselves 
to the living God (ver. 9), by imparting hope for 
the future (ver. 10), and by strengthening our 
hopes for others (ver. 7); 3. Sympathy inasmuch 
as they open our hearts to our brethren (ver. 8), 
lead all to prayer and thanksgiving for one an- 
other (ver. 11) and to mutual joy in the day of 
the Lord Jesus. Comp. F. W. Robertson’s Lectt. 
on Corr. Lect. xxxiv. ] 


I1I.—THE APOSTLE’S VINDICATION OF HIS CONDUCT IN GENERAL, AND OF HIS 
EPISTLES AND JOURNEYS IN PARTICULAR (Vy. 12-24). 


CuaptTerR I. 12-24. 


12 


For our rejoicing [glorying] is this, the testimony of our! conscience, that in sim- 
Oo Lo Θ ) , 


plicity [holiness]? and godly* sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of 
God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward. 
13 For we write none other things unto you, than* what ye read or acknowledge; 
14 and I trust ye shall acknowledge even’ to the end; as also ye have acknowledged us 
in part, that we are your rejoicing [glorying], even as ye also are ours in the day of 


15 the Lord® Jesus. 


And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before’ [be- 


16 fore unto you], that ye might have® a second benefit; and to pass? by you into Mace- 
donia, and to come again out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought on my 


18 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








17 way toward Judea. When I therefore was thus minded,” did I use lightness? or the 
things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be 
yea, yea, and nay, nay? But as God 5 true [faithful], our word toward you was [is]" 
not yea and nay.’ For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by 
us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. 
For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him? Amen [For how many 
soever may be the promises of God, in Him is the yea; wherefore also through him is 
the Amen], unto the glory of God by us. Now he which stablisheth us with you in 
Christ, and hath anointed us, ὦ God; who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest 
of the Spirit in our hearts. Moreover [But] I call God for a record [witness] upon 
my soul, that [it was] to spare you [that] I came not as yet [no more] unto Corinth. 
24 Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by 
faith ye stand. 


18 
19 


20 


21 
22 
23 


{1 Ver. 12.—Instead of the 2d ἡμῶν, Alvord and Scrivener (in Wordsworth) say that Cod. Sinait., in the ed. by Tisch. of 
1863 has sea by the first hand and ἡμῶν by the second, In the edit. of 1865 by Tisch. no notice is taken of any varia 
tion here. 

2 Rec. has ἁπλότητι instead of ἁγιότητι, and it is strongly sustained [by Ὁ. E. F. G. L. Sin. (cor.8), the Latt. Syr, 
Vulg. and Goth. vss. Chrys., Theodt., Jerome, Ambrosiast, Theophyl. and Oecum. ‘Tisch. has restored it in his later ed. 
and says: “ Probabilius est ἁγιότητι ulpote quod esset multo plus quam ἁπλότητι, aliena manu inlatum quam sublutum 
esse.’ Pauluses it more commonly especially in 2Cor.}. And yet ἁγιότητι is adopted by Lachmann [Alford and Stanley] 
after A. B. C. K. M. [Sinait. (cor.!), the Copt. aud Arm. vss., Clem., Orig., Damasc. and Didymus]. It is a more uncommon 
word, and so (some have argued) less likely to beinserted, aud is used nowhere else except in Heb. xi. 10 and Il 
Macc. xv. 2. 

[8 Many recent editors (Tisch., Bloomf., Alf., Stanl., Wordsw.) insert τοῦ before the first θεοῦ after A. B. C. Ὁ. Εἰ Sin., 
with a number of vss. and Fathers. Bloomfield thinks that internal evidence is also strongly in its favor). 

4 Ver. 18.—The reading of the Rec. is satisfactorily attested. There are no sufticient critical authorities for the 
omission of either ἀλλ᾽ or 7 or a. 

δ According to the best authorities, καὶ before ἕως should be omitted. 

6 Ver. 14.—The last ἡμῶν is an addition by a later hand. [Sinait., and B. et al. have it. 
Wordsw. omit it, and Stanley brackets it as suspicious. ] 

7 Ver. 15.—The best authorities put πρότερον before ελθειν; Rec. puts it before ἵνα. [Tisch. and Wordsw. read: πρότ. 
ἐλθ. πρὸς ὑμᾶς - Bloomf. retains the Rec. but inserts τὸ before πρότερον ; Lachm., Meyer, Alf., Stanl. and Kling read: πρότ. 
mpos ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν ; Sinait. omits πρότερον altogether, and reads; ἐβουλ. πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐλθειν.] 

; [8 For ἔχητε, Alford has σχῆτε with B.C. and Sin., but Tisch. thinks that the latter was conformed to the tense of 
βουλόμην. ᾿ 

9 rex, ia ie has διελθεῖν : Lachmann, with good authorities, has ἀπελθξιν. The former was possibly derived from 
1 Cor. xvi.5. [Tisch. thinks that “ διελθεῖν was disliked by some transcribers because the διὰ seemed sufficiently implied 
in δι᾽ ὑμῶν ; hence ἀπελθεῖν or ἐλθεῖν (which is found also in many MSS8.), seemed more appropriate. Comp. Rom. xy. 28, 
where no one has taken the liberty of changing ἀπελεύσομαι δι᾿ ὑμῶν " 

10 Ver, 17.—Rec. has βουλευόμενος with many authorities, in some respects, of great weight. The original reading was 

robably βουλόμενος (Lach. after A. B. C. [Sin.] et al.) The other was probably a correction from the following sentence. 
Pwith quite equal plausibility Tisch. suggests that “ the ἐβουλόμην of the previous sentence was more likely to have in- 
duced a change than the subsequent βουλεύομαι.᾽ 

11 Ver. 18.—The weight of evidence is decidedly in favor of ἔςτιν instead of ἐγένετο in the Rec., which was probably 
an accommodation to the following verse. [Alford thinks it a correction to suit the supposed reference to the past. But 
Bloomf. thinks that ἔστιν is quite as likely to be a correction to suit what the critics thought a required reference to the 
present, not recollecting that the imperfect is often used to designate habitual action, so as to be nearly equivalent to the 
present. He also adds, as aconfirmation of this view, that one ancient MS. (Cod. C.) has ἔστι instead of ἐγένετο in ver. 9, 
where it is manifestly a critical alteration. The authorities, however, in favor of ἔστιν (A. B.C. Ὁ. F. Sin., &c.) are alto- 
gether satisfactory.) 

12 Ver, 20.—Rec. has καὶ ἐν αὐτω ; Lachm., after the oldest MSS. [A. B. C. F. 6. Sin., Vulg., Goth., Copt. Damasce. &c.], 
has & καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ. Meyer thinks that διὸ has accidentally been left out (a number of MSS. have καὶ δι᾿ αὐτοῦ): and 
that the words were then conformed to those just preceding. [De Wette thinks that Lachmann’s reading originated 
in Theodoret’s comment: ob δὴ χάριν καὶ δι’ αὐτοῦ τὸν τῆς εὐχαριστίας αὐτῷ προσφέρομεν ὕμνον ; but it is not certain 
from this what must have been the text on which Theodt. commented (see note to Migne’s Theodt., p. 883). Alford 
concedes that the weight of external authority is with Lachm., but thinks that in that case ἡμῶν must mean ἡμῶν Kai 
ὑμῶν, which without notice it could hardly do.] : 


Alford inserts it, Bloomf. and 


ested in him to assist him by their intercessions. 
He now gives them to understand that he was 
justified in such an assumption, for he was 
not unworthy of their sympathies and their 
prayers. Such is the connection which we infer 
from the ydp. 

Ver. 12. For our rejoicing is this.— 


EXEGETICAL AND ORITICAL. 


In that which the Apostle has thus far said we 
may notice an apologetical element. He had 
spoken of those troubles which his Judaizing 


opponents represented as a token of the divine 
displeasure. He had implied that these were so 
far from being such a token and a reason for the 
withdrawal of confidence from him, that they 
were rather an indication of his fellowship with 
Christ and a reasonable ground for an affectionate 
communion between him and the church. But in 
whatever way we regard the preceding verses, 
the Apostle’s vindication of himself evidently 
commences with this section, though it is in inti- 
mate connection with what he had just taken for 
granted, viz., that they were sufficiently inter- 


The word καύχησις, as it is used in 1 Cor. xv. 81, 
and frequently in this"Epistle, is not equivalent 
to καύχημα : that of which one makes his boast, for 
it signif-s rather the act of boasting, the external 
expression of joyful confidence. It here relates to 
the whole moral conduct of the Apostle, as Benge) 
has itr even in seasons of adversity and in his 
conduct towards his opponents. The inward 
feeling of which it is the outward expression is 
the testimony of our conscience, to 
which it is emphatically directed by airy. The 
word συνείδησις (here rendered conscience) ia 


CHAP. I. 12-24. 


found also in 1 Cor. viii. 7; x. 25 οἱ al. It is 
here closely connected with the objective sen- 
tence:—that in holiness and godly sin- 
cerity, we have had our conversation in 
the world.*—’Avaorpeg¢éofa occurs here and 
in Eph. ii. 3; 1 Tim. iii. 16; Heb. xii. 18; 1 
Pet. i. 17; 2 Pet. ii. 18. In the Sept. of Prov. xx. 


2M and 


signifies the conduct, the way in which one acts. 
By ἐν is indicated the path in which the move- 
ment takes place, and which determines and di- 
rects the mode of action referred to. If we ac- 
cept of ἁγιότης as the true reading, the idea will 
be that of a religious purity, arising from an un- 
reserved surrender of the heart to God. On ac- 
count of the numerous and independent critical 
authorities in its favor, and because dyiéryc¢ has 
too general a meaning in connection with εἰλε- 
kpiveia, and might have been suggested by τοῦ ϑεοῦ, 
etc., Osianler gives the preference to ἁπλότης, 
signifying a freedom from all irrelevant and pri- 
vate views, 7. ¢., a plain single mind. Εἰλικρίνεία 
tov ϑεοῦ, godly sincerity, is either a purity like 
that which isin God, or one which comes from him 
or is wrought by him in those who submit them- 
selves to him. Tov ϑεοῦ designates the source 
and the consequent resemblance. The idea of be- 
ing acceptable to God necessarily follows from 
this, but it is not strictly contained in the ex- 
pression. Still less does it signify what is de- 
manded by God, and least of all what is superior, 


7, it is used as a rendering for 


as if it were merely a superlative. Thesubjoined 


antithetic definition of the same idea:—not in 
carnal wisdom, but in the grace of God, 
—more precisely explains what is meant by ἐν 
ἁγιότης. The σοφία σαρκικὴ (1 Cor. i. 20 aod. 
τοῦ κόσμου; 1 Cor, ii. 5 cog. ἀνθρώπων ; 1 Cor. ii. 6 
Tov αἰῶνος τούτου) forms in this passage a contrast 
on the one hand, to the holiness and godly sincerity, 





{* The word συνέιδησις, signifies etymologically, a man’s 
knowledge of or conversation with himself. Hugo de St. 
Victor says: Quando cor se noscit, appellatur conscientiu ; 
quando preter se alia noscit, appellatur scientia. 10 refers, 
however, only to that part of our self-consciousness which 
is practical, moral and religious, viz.: to what ought or 
ought not to be done. Thus far it is only what Antoninus 
(Florentinus) called συντήρησις, ἵ. e., careful watching or ob- 
servation, “the phylactery, or keeper of the records,” and 
hence a witness with a faithful testimony, as in the text. 
Beyond this, it is, as in Rom. ii. 15, a judge of that which is 
right or wrong in these records, as the facts are understood. 
Finally, it rewards or punishes by the pleasure or pain 
which its decisions produce, as in the text it was Paul’s re- 
joicing. Origen includes all this when he calls συνείδ. “a 
pedagogue to admonish the soul of better things, to chastise 
her for her faults and to reprove her.” -The Schoolmen 
turned these three Scriptural functions into a syllogism. 
The inspired writers make faith indispensable to a good 
conscience, to give us right views of our relations, and so of 
our duties and sins. They sometimes speak of one being 
judged by another man’s conscience, inasmuch as the deci- 
sions we have passed upon our own conduct may be applied 
to another’s. Bp. Jer. Taylor’s Ductor Dub. B. I. Chap. 1; 
Schenkel, Art. Gewissen in Hertzog’s Encyc.; McCosh, Div. 
Goy. III. 1,4; Chalmers, Mor. Phil. Chap. V.; Rothe, Theol. 
Eth. I. 2 147.] [Tyndale renders ἁπλότης : “singleness,” on 
which Trench remarks (Synn. 2d Ser. p. 23) that it would be 
impossible to improve it. Its literal meaniag is: simplez, 
einfaltig, one-folded. Suicer: “animus alienus a versutia, 
 ehata simulatione, dolo malo, et studio nocendi aliis.” 

engel defines εἰλικρινεία, “ sincerity, without the admixture 
of any foreign quality.” Trench (Synn. 2d Ser p- 172) and 
Ellicott (Phil. I. 20) prefer Stallbaum’s derivation from 
€tAy and κρίνω, according to which it means : “that which is 
cleansed by much rolling and shaking to and fro in a 
sieve ;”—“ not that which is proved by being held up to the 
sunlight, but the purged, the winnowed, the unmingled.”] 


19 


— 








and the εἰλικρίνεια τοῦ Seov, and on the other, to 
the grace of God. This last phrase signifies 
God’s. free grace; in which, however, is in- 
cluded a surrender and communication of his 
own infinite self with all the blessings of salva- 
tion; just as the holiness and the sincerity had in- 
volved a power which moved and directed the 
Apostle from within himself.—In contrast with 
this divine disposition, is presented that impure 
fleshly wisdom which belongs to our sensuous 
and selfish nature, and which inclines us to pur- 
sue our own enjoyment, profit, honor or applause, 
and hence leads us off into inconsistent courses 
of conduct. Osiander thinks that here is also an 
allusion to that theoretical kind of σοφία (1 Cor. 
i. 8) which made use of the various artificial 
methods supplied by the Rhetoric and Logic of 
that period to gain influence over the minds of 
men. [TuHEopHYLACT: ‘words of stirring elo- 
quence, and twistings of sophistries.’’] But evi- 
dently a more practical kind of worldly wisdom 
was then uppermost in the Apostle’s mind.—The 
sphere of the conversation is the world, which, 
according to Meyer, is the profane portion of 
men, inasmuch as the Apostle’s object was to 
make his holy walk more prominent by the con- 
trast. We may certainly regard the non-christian 
element in society as intended, in distinction 
from the churches, which were represented here 
by the Corinthians (πρὸς ὑμᾶς). ἹΠερισσοτέρως (more 
abundantly) has reference to a higher degree, 
and not toa higher quality. Πρὸς ὑμᾶς has the 
sense of: in intercourse with you, and it is there- 
fore equivalent to, with you; NEANDER: ‘‘ with 
reference to you. We may conclude from this 
verse that his opponents had charged him with 
practising a spurious kind of worldly wisdom, 
which indicated a lack of uprightness of heart.” 
—W. F. Besser: ‘Not asif his Christian inter- 
course with them had been characterized by any 
thing extraordinary, or beyond what he had 
shown in other places. He intended simply to 
say: ‘‘Ifthere are any to whom I have not been 
manifest as a single-hearted and sincere minister 
of Christ, surely it cannot be you (1 Cor. ix. 2), 
for where in allthe world have I been more com- 
pletely known than among you?” 

Vers. 13, 14. For we write none other 
things unto you—He now confirms his avowal 
that he had been sincere in his treatment of 
them, so far as relates to his Epistles. He 
probably has reference to the suspicions which 
his opponents had awakened, that his language 
meant something very different from that which 
they seemed to mean to an unsuspicious reader.— 
The full and well attested reading: ἀλλ᾽ ἡ a, equi- 
valent to  ἅ or ἀλλ᾽ ad, is a blending together of 
two constructions: οὐκ ἅλλ᾽---ῦ and οὐκ ἀλλα---- 
ἀλλὰ (comp. Meyer) [Jelf. Gram. 3773. Obs. 1-3]. 
—But we are writing;—He here refers (as 
in 1 Cor. y. 11) to that which he was then 
writing, and to the meaning which it properly 
conveyed: we have no other meaning in what 
we have written than what you yourselves read, 
and what is the literal signification of the lan- 
guage before the eye of the reader.—No other 
things unto you than what ye read, or in- 
deed acknowledge.—The words or acknow- 
ledge, refer to what they had known, in other ways, 
of what he then meant. There is no need of au 


20 


artificial distinction between ἀναγινώσκειν in the 
sense of recognoscere, and ἐπιγινώσκειν in the sense 
of agnoscere (Calvin), a distinction which is, more- 
over, opposed to the uniform usage of ἀναγινώσκειν 
in the New Testament.*—In the succeeding clause 
another object of discussion is introduced. It is to 
be derived not from the preceding 4, as if it were 
equivalent to all that the Apostle in his sincerity 
had performed and suffered among them (Osian- 
der), but it comes before us in the form of a dis- 
tinct proposition, viz.: that we are your re- 
joicing. This sentence grammatically depends 
upon ἐπιγνώσεσϑε [as that which they should 
continue to acknowledge unto the end], and 
not upon the intervening clause with which 
it might be connected according to the sense. 
The words might indeed be taken as a causal 
sentence, giving a reason for what is said in the 
previous clause (comp. Osiander), but the logical 
connection would certainly be less forcible.-—The 
phrase, unto the end, means, as in 1 Cor. i. 8, 
ancl Heb. iii. 6, the absolute end of all things, and 
not merely the Apostle’s close of life. In part, 
in the intermediate clause, expresses a limitation, 
not in opposition to unto the end, nor with respect 
to the recognition itself, asif equivalent to: in some 
degree; but with respect to the persons recog- 
nizing, implying that only a part of the Church 
recognized him in his true character. This is the 
only view which accords with the facts. <A re- 
proach would not haye been here appropriate. 
Kab ynua occurs in 1 Cor. y. 6 and ix. 15f. Inthe 
day of the Lord Jesus, belongs to the principal 
proposition, but requires also to be joined to the 
incidental clause. He meant to express his con- 
fidence that they would steadfastly acknowledge 
that he was indeed the object of their glorying, 
and would continue to be so even to the last day, 
when teachers and churches shall stand before 
the great Chief Shepherd, and when all events 
and the way in which they have been brought 
about shall be open to inspection. He had no 
doubt that they would point with joyful triumph 
to him as the one through whom they and so 
many others had been brought to Christ, and to 
all the enjoyments and honors which have been 
derived from him, as the one to whom they owed 
their spiritual life with all its benefits and digni- 
ties; just as he on his side even then pointed to 
them as the honorable fruit of his labors (Comp. 
1 Cor. ix. 1s; 1, 8; Phil. ii. 16; 1 Thess. ii. 19). 





(* There is a peculiar play upon the Greek words ava- and 
ἐπι-γινώσκετε Which is well brought out by Chrysostom: 
ἀναγινώσκοντες yap ἐπιγινώσκετε, OTL ἅ σύνιστε ἡμῖν ἐν τοῖς 


ἐργοῖς. ταῦτα καὶ ἐν τοῖς γράμμασι λέγομεν" καὶ οὐκ EVAVTO = | 


ταί ὑμῶν ἡ μαρτυρία ταῖς ἐπϊστολαῖΐς, ἀλλὰ συνάδει TH ἀνα- 
γνώσει ἡ γνῶσις, ἣν προλαβόντες ἐΐχετε περὶ ἡμῶν. “For us 
ye read ye acknowledge that we write the very things 
which ye are conscious that we are in our conduct; and this 
your testimony is not contradicted by what we write but 
what ye previously knew of us corresponds with what ye 
read.” Migne’s Chrys., Vol. X., p.405. The idea of the 
Apostle is: we have no esoteric meaning, no meaning at one 
time which we have not always. none in speaking or acting 
which we have not in these Epistles, none indeed which 
you will not find ia the confessions you are in the habit of 
reading publicly in your meetings. Conybeare thinks that 
Paul was referring to some insinuations that he wrote to 
some private individuals ina different strain from that of 
his public letters. Bengel and Hodge think that ἐπιγνώσις 
is more than ἀναγνώσις, inasmuch as the former combines 
the ideas of recognition and complete knowledge. Comp. 
chap. iii. 2, and 1 Cor. xiii 12; for not only the force of the 
words γινώσκω and ἐπιγν, but also the use of the Aorist for 
the present.) 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


en nnn τ -΄--ςς- 





Vy. 15-20. Having thus drawn their hearts 
to a firmer confidence in him and to withstand 
more successfully the influence of his opponents, 
the Apostle now proceeds to repel the charge of 
inconsistency and fickleness which had been 
made against him because he had changed the plan 
of his journey in coming to them.—And in 
this confidence I was minded before to 
come unto you.—Most recent commentators 
refer the πεποίϑησις (confidence, trust) to what has 
been expressed in ἐλπίζω, &c.; asif he was intend- 
ing to say that under the influence of this confi- 
dence in their steadfast recognition of his true re- 
lation to them, he had at first formed the design 
to pay them a visit, &c.—Some would draw the 
πρότερον into immediate connection with ἐβουλό- 
μὴν [q. d. I was before minded], but not only 
would this be incoherent in itself, since he 
was yet desirous of this thing, but it would 
also be unsuitable to δευτέραν yaprv.—The position 
of the words πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν, by which ὑμας is 
more properly contrasted with Macedonia, is at- 
tested by good authorities.—This had been the 
Apostle’s originalintention, but it had been given 
up as early as when he wrote his first Epistle. 
Comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 5. This alteration of his plan 
had become known to the Corinthians either by 
letter or by personal conversation, and it had 
been represented to them as an evidence of his 
general fickleness of character. Hence the pro- 
priety of this defence of himself. That ye 
might have a second benefit.—He here 
refers to what had been the object of his 
original plan.—Every visit he might make to 
them would be the occasion of many blessings, 
and would manifest the divine favor toward them. 
Had he visited them a second time, his presence 
with them would haye been asecond grace. Such 
had been his aim when he formed that earlier 
plan, the only motive of which they might see in 
the confidence he had just expressed. And now 
when he declares that that confidence always 
animated him and had prompted such a friendly 
purpose, he implies that no thought of a miscon- 
struction of his motives could have crossed his 
mind when he changed his plan. Χάρις (grace 
or favor) has not the same meaning with χαρά, 
(as some would have the original read, signi- 
fying yoy, or a new delight which his visit would 
give), nor does it signify an exhibition of human 
favor, but it is equivalent to χάρισμα πνευματικόν 
(a spiritual gift) in Rom i. 11 (comp. xy. 29). 
The meaning of δευτέραν is not the same here as 
that of διπλῆν would have been. We need not 
suppose that his first residence in Corinth, or his _ 
first Epistle is referred to as the first grace, for 
the context (ver. 16) shows evidently what he had 
in view, and this seems inconsistent with the other- 
wise probable hypothesis that πρότερον implies 
that the Apostle had been at Corinth since his 
first residence there. In ver, 16 we have more de. 
finite information regarding this earlier plan, and 
light is thrown also upon what is meant by their 
receiving a second benefit, but weare not therefore 
to conclude that this latter expression stands out of 
its proper place.—With respect to his being sent on 
his way, consult 1 Cor. xvi. 6.—Tovro, in ver. 17, 
has reference to the earlier plan which had been 
spoken of in ver. 15f. He is meeting the objection 
which had been raised against him on account of 


CHAP. I. 12-24. 





his change of purpose. The amount of this objec- 
tion was, that he could not have reflected sufhi- 
ciently upon his plan and the way in which he was 
to accomplish ii, and so that he became guilty of 
light-mindedness; or that if he had really in- 
tended to visit them, he either could not have 
been very strenuous in carrying out his purpose, 
and so had changed his mind without sufficient 
reasons, or he had not much regard to his pro- 
mise. That such an objection had been made to 
him, in fact, is not to be inferred, perhaps, from 
the article τη, as if this referred to the particular 
lightness which had been imputed to him, for 
this may also be pointed to the levity which 
would generally be suspected in such cases.— 
Did I use lightness.—’Hiagpia (lightness) is 
found nowhere else in the New ‘Testament, 
although the adjective occurs twice (chap. iv. 17 
and Matth. xi. 30), but not with an ethical sig- 
nification. Χρῆσϑαι, when used with reference 
to moral states or qualities, means to have a hand 
in, to be occupied with, to enter upon, some 
‘business, and is equivalent to: behaving or con- 
ducting one’s self in a certain manner. “Apa, in 
an interrogative sentence, implies that the in- 
quirer will wait for an answer (well, really! in- 
deed! comp. [Jelf. Gr. Gram., 3 873, 2.] Passow 
I., 377), and hence indicates necessarily no logi- 
cal deduction (a consequence from this state of 
things). The second question,—or the things 
which I purpose, do I purpose according 
to the flesh ?—is either codrdinated with the 
first (in which case 7 is equivalent to aut), or 
subordinated to it (7 having the force of an), and 
implying that the contrary would lead to an ab- 
surdity: ‘if, then, you would not charge me with 
levity, you must suppose that I form my purposes 
according to the flesh” (Meyer). This subordi- 
nation would agree very well with the expla- 
nation which refers ἐχρησάμην to the purpose 
itself; but the codrdination would suit best the 
interpretation which refers that word rather to 
the carrying out of the purpose, and introduces 
here the additional point respecting the improper 
spirit shown in the formation of the purpose. 
And yet this last is probably the more correct 
Meaning. Κατὰ σάρκα, however, refers to that 
which determines the mind when it is coming to a 
decision, or it is the same as to say that the con- 
clusion was reached in the way in which the cdpé 
usually determines us, 7. e., in a carnal manner. 
The real meaning would be essentially the same 
oneither interpretation. The opposite of this is: 
κατὰ πνξυμα. Where the spirit controls a man in 
all his conduct, the sole object of his consulta- 
tions and conclusions is the honor, the kingdom 
and the will of God, but where the σάρξ, (7. e., the 
nature of man, when it is confined to the pursuit 
of external and selfish objects), controls his de- 
cisions, nothing will be regarded but outward 
relations, selfish inclinations, personal interests, 
or something to accommodate, please, profit, or 
flatter himself.—A spiritual mind always makes 
a man decided, consistent, true to himself, and 
uniform in all his conduct; but a carnal mind 
makes him uncertain in all his ways, and involves 
him in many contradictory courses. This neces- 
sary result, the Apostle presents as if it were the 
object of the person’s design or aim, iva 7, &c. 
If we follow the correct reading ναὶ vai—dv ov 








21 


——-< 


(the Vulgate and some other verss. have simply va 
—0ov), the second vai and dv might belong to the 
predicate: that the yea with me should be yea, 
and the nay should be nay (comp. James y. 12); 
and the whole might refer to an obstinate and 
presumptuous course of conduct, in which a man 
adheres to his determination, and resolves that 
his yea shall remain yea, and his nay shall con- 
tinue nay. The idea would thus be that he will 
never change his mind, whether he had resolved 
upon a yea or anay, a promise or a refusal, a 
doing or a declining to do somethifg. But, ac- 
cording to the context, the objection the Apostle 
was here meeting was not so much to his con- 
sistent obstinacy as to his inconsistent fickleness. 
The double form of vai, vai and οὔ, οὔ is merelg 
to give additional force te the simple form in 
ver. 18, as in Matth. v. 87. The predicate is 
either, should Le with us also, nay, nay; 7. 6. the 
yea, yea, may become with us nay, nay; that is, 
the purpose or the promise may change about into 
just the opposite according to convenience; or 
(better) merely should be with us; in which case 
καὶ has the ordinary sense of, and:—that there 
should be with me the yea, yea, and the 
nay, nay.—[Chrysostom forcibly gives the ob- 
jection which is met by the Apostle in this passage 
(vv. 18-22) thus: “1 when you promised to come 
to us, you failed todo so, and your yea is not yea, 
nor your nay nay; but what you say now you 
change afterwards, as you have done in regard 
to your coming to us, woe to us lest this also 
should be the case with your preaching! In 
order, therefore, that they might not think thus, 
he assures them that God was faithful, and that 
His word to them was not yea and nay; for in 
his preaching such changes could not happen, 
but only in his travels and journeyings.] Their 
objection must then have been that the Apos- 
tle had both these intentions together and at the 
same time, and hence that he could not be de- 
pended upon, was equivocal, self-contradictory, 
and took back at one time what he had just be- 
fore promised (not as Olshausen arbitrarily as- 
sumes, that truth and falsehood were blended 
together).—Very different from all this was 
the actual conduct of the Apostle toward them, 
based as it was upon motives of the highest love 
and wisdom, ver. 28.—As God is faithful, our 
word towards you is not yea and nay:— 
He here proceeds in the first place to meet the 
objection ina very solemn but lively manner (ver. 
18), introducing his assertion with a dé (which, 
however, has not the force of μᾶλλον dé, as if he 
would give a still further denial to the question). 
Πιστὸς δὲ ὁ ϑεός, ὅτι, &c., may here be taken 
either as saying that God’s fidelity was the reason 
he ventured to assert such a consistency for him- 
self, 7. 6. he asserted such things of himself de- 
cause God was faithful—God is faithful in this 
(εἰς τοῦτο), and this fact makes it impossible that 
we should speak in this uncertain manner among 
you (Meyer)—or, as a solemn protestation: as 
surely as God is true, our word toward you, éfc. 
de Wette, Osiander). The former seems harsh, 
and is not grammatically confirmed by a referenca 
to John ix. 17, where ὅτε has the force of: be- 
cause, since. Πιστὸς ὁ ϑεός may be a form of 
solemn affirmation as well as ἔστιν ἀλήϑεια χριστὸν 
ἐν ἐμοί in chap. xi. 10, and it goes probably on 


a 


22 
the assumption that God was a witness. Comp. 
Rom. i. 9; Phil. i. 8; 1 Thess. ii. 5. He thus 


brings forward the fidelity (reliableness) of God 
as a security for the reliableness of his own λόγος. 
But what does he mean by this λόγος ἢ Does it 
refer to his promise to visit them, or to his dis- 
courses generally, i. 6. to everything he had said 
to them in any way? or finally does it refer to his 
doctrines and public instructions (κήρυγμα) ΤΣ We 
are decidedly in favor of the last for the reason 
assigned in the next verse, in which the Apostle 
maintains that his instructions must be perfectly 
reliable because they consisted of truths which 
were incontrovertible and irresistible. NEANDER: 
«Every way in which he held intercourse with 
the Corinthians, his instructions as a whole.” 
But such an assertion of the credibility of his 
teaching should have an influence also to ward off 
those accusations which had been made against 
those decisions which related to his official work 
(such as his apostolical journeys), just as these 
latter had created a prejudice against his teach- 
ings. 

For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who 
was preached among youby us (Ver. 19).— 
[‘‘In place of the preaching he here puts Him 
who was preached (metonomy); and says that 
the doctrine concerning the Son of God which 
he and Silvanus and Timotheus had preached 
contained no discrepancies, nor did they at one 
time preach this and at another time that, but 
they brought forward always the same doctrine.”’ 
TueoporetT]. Τοῦ ϑεοῦ, according to the true 
reading, precedes yap, and thus becomes em- 
phatic, in order to give prominence tothe Divine 
part of the subject of their preaching. It evi- 
dently has reference to what had been said in 
ver. 18, respecting ὁ ϑεός. Κηρυχθείς relates to the 
preaching by which they had been at first brought 
to believe in Christ. He describes this as the 
common testimony of the three organs of Divine 
revelation who had been associated at that time 
(Acts xviii. δ). It should not, however, be sup- 
posed that the Christ thus preached signifies the 
same thing as the preaching of Christ, for then 
yap would serve only to introduce an explanation 
or further exposition of what had been said in 
ver. 18. Comp. ver. 20. [In describing ‘the 
Son of God, Jesus Christ,” the epithets are accu- 
mulated ‘to express the greatness of Him whom 
they preached, and so to aggravate the impossi- 
bility of His connection with any littleness or 
levity.”” Srantey]. Of Him, as he had been 
preached among the Corinthians, the Apostle 
says: he was not made yea and nay, but 
has been made yea in him; i. 6., He has 
proved Ilimself among you as among others, not 
an untruthful, untrustworthy and ambiguous per- 
sonage, saying yea and nay at the same time; but 





* [Wordsworth remarks that Panl “does not say (ver. 15), 
that it was his settled purpose βούλευμα, nor yet his 
θέλημα or will, to visit them. See Matth. i. 19, where 
ἐβουλήθη signifies only: was minded, and Philem. 13. 
where ἐβουλόμην signifies: it was my wish, where the 
wish was finally controlled and overruled by the will. He 
does not say he wrote that he was resolved to pass by them 
into Macedonia but only that he was wishing (imperf.) to do 
so. Iu v.17, there isa’contrast between βούλομαι and 
BovAevouai, and his defence is, that instead of being 
lightminded, his wishes were controlled by his will, which 
was regulated by right reason and the will of God, so that his 
BovAymara were clearly subject to his βονλεύματα.") 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





one in whom an everlasting yea, a pure, steadfast 
affirmation might always be found (comp. Heb. 
xiii. 8; Rev. ili. 14). ‘* The whole Old Testament 
revelation has proved to be true by means of the 
Christ who has been preached among you. And 
yet, what is thus true of the objective Christ, must 
be applied with equal truth to the word preached 
respecting him.” NeanprEr. [The verb here used, 
γέγονεν, signifies not mere existence, but a transi- 
tion from one state, or character, or condition, to 
another (Webster’s Synn. of the Gr. Test., p. 
199). Being in the perfect. tense, it implies that 
the change spoken of is not only completed, but 
that the result of it is conceived of as permanent 
(Winer, 341, 4). It hath become yea, and it re- 
mains yea in Him forever. My plans and pur- 
poses may change, but the subject of my preach- 
ing remains the same under every mutation 
of its preachers]. ; 

The more particular declaration and reason 
assigned in the next verse shows that what had 
just been asserted had reference to the experi- 
ence, not merely of the Corinthians, (who had 
been spoken of in the phrase, preached among 
you), but of Christians in general; For how- 
ever numerous may be the promises of 
God (inthe Old Testament), in Him is the yea, 
(ὦ. e., the affirmation of them, ver. 20); inasmuch as 
they are actually fulfilled in Him, or He secures 
their fulfilment in the future. By means of His 
person and work, the certainty of all God’s pro- 
mises has been practically confirmed (comp. 
Rom. xv. 8; Jno. i. 17; Acts iii. 21). To this 
external confirmation in Christ, corresponds the 
Amen, which is not added merely to strengthen 
the yea (as the Rec. would make it), but it ex- 
presses the unanimous assent which believers 
yield to the objective truth, the confession they 
make with respect to the actual fulfilment every- 
where taking place at the time, with an allusion 
also to the Amen which the primitive Christians 
were in the habit of responding in their public 
assemblies. Even this confession is by means of 
Christ, for inasmuch as the fulfilment itself takes 
place in Him, the confession must be drawn from 
believers by Him through our means to the glory 
of God. Or: all God’s promises are yea in 
Christ’s person and work, 7. ¢., in His name, as 
it is proclaimed in the Gospel, and are Amen in 
the Church which confesses His name (Besser). 
—The words δύ ἡμῶν [through or by means of 
us] might possibly be referred to believers in 
general, but the context more naturally connects 
them with those only, who are Christ’s ministers; 
and the Amen is either the joyful and believing 
testimony of such ministers, or (more correctly 
and more strictly conformed to the usage with 
respect to duyv), the public expression of confi- 
dence which all believers gave. The phrase to 
the glory of God by us is in apposition with 
that which precedes it, and signifies, that which 
glorifies God by our means, ἢ, e., when we who 
proclaim the Gospel are the instruments of pro- 
ducing the confidence thus expressed (Meyer).— 
The article is placed before vai and ἀμὴν in ver. 
20, because the yea has here acquired a definite 
position with respect to the ἐπαγγελίαι. There is 
no necessity of supplying a subject for the affir- 
mation in this yea (as e.g. in ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αὑτῷ 
γέγονεν), nor of understanding by it that which 


CHAP. I. 12-24. 


23 


ee |.ὴᾺΕο.ὺοᾺῴκ΄΄ἷἵὔἵὔὺἷἧϊἑ ΄᾿-τ--΄ .-ς---ς-.--.-Ἀ-ρ-ς-ςς- 


He (i. 6., Christ) has affirmed (the preceding yea), 
but it is itself the subject. [Bengel: Christ 
preached, 7. ¢., our preaching of Christ became 
yea in Christ Himself]. [Obviously, then, the 
Apostle would argue, there could be no variable- 
ness in the subject (λόγος) of His preaching, since 
God who gave it was faithful, and Christ who is 
its substance is the same in all ages, however the 
promises respecting Him might vary. The 
whole revelation of Christ, whether in Old Testa- 
ment writing or in the preaching of the Apostle 
and his companions, had been one everlasting 
affirmation from God to men like a mighty yea 
poured forth from heaven through all genera- 
tions. He was then, had been, and ever would 
be the same (Ex. iii. 14; Jno. viii. 58). Even in 
the experience of those to whom the Apostle was 
writing, this was manifest, for they were accus- 
tomed in all their assemblies to join with be- 
lievers of every.age and country in responding 
their hearty Amen to the instructions and wor- 
ship of the Church. Thus the earth’s Amen re- 
sponded to heaven’s yea in Christ]. In ver. 20, 
ἐπαγγελίαι refers to the promises not of the New, 
but of the Old Testament, such as the Apostle 
speaks of in Gal. iii. 16 ff. and Rom. iv. 13; to 
the promise of salvation in all its clear details, 
and not merely to that of the Holy Spirit.—Even 
with the reading given in the Recep.: καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ 
τὸ ἀμήν (retained by Osiander, with Tischendorf 
and Reiche), we need no other explanation than 
that we have just given. We shall not need to 
refer the yea to the God who promises and the 
Amen to the Christ in whom the promises are 
fulfilled (Beza); nor to regard the Amen as an 
expression of what is complete truth, 7. e., an 
idea expressed in two languages (as in the case 
of Abba, Father), with reference to both Jewish 
and Gentile Christians; nor yet to make the 
Amen God’s seal to man’s Amen, ἢ. e., to the con- 
fidence they thus expressed (?) (Osiander). Even 
on the supposition that the Amen refers to the 
subjective confidence of believers, it would not 
be inconsistent with the Apostle’s aim to set forth 
the complete objective certainty of the Divine 
promises, secured as they were in all their 
strength through Christ, and so forming a basis 
on which he could claim confidence for himself. 
That internal confidence which the Corinthians 
had yielded to his preaching, and which they had 
openly confessed, was a sufficient proof of his 
trustworthiness as an Apostle. NEANDER: ‘In 
this way he met in the most effectual manner the 
suspicions which his opponents had cast upon 
his instructions, by appealing to the experience 
which the Corinthians had received of the power 
of Divine grace through Christ upon their 
hearts.” But after all the arguments which 
have been urged against the reading, διὸ καὶ δὲ 
αὐτοῦ, we do not regard them as of sufficient 
weight to induce us to set it aside, or to give 
us entire confidence in that of the Recepta. [The 
sense of the two readings is somewhat different. 
By Lachmann’s reading (preferred by Calvin and 
most of the ancient expositors), it is asserted, 
that, however various God’s promises might be, 
their yea was in Christ, and hence that the 
Amen which expresses human experience must 
be in Him also. According to this, not only do 
the promises receive their confirmation in Christ, 














but we experience and assent to their truth. By 
the common reading the Apostle simply asserts, 
that the promises had received their verification, 
(their yea and Amen), in Christ. Certainly the 
tenor of the Apostle’s argument is most strength- 
ened by the former reading]. 

Ver. 21, 22. [One thought still lingers in the 
Apostle’s mind, which he must express before 
he returns to his personal defence (comp. Stan- 
ley)]. The firm faith which Christ had effected, 
and which had brought such glory to God by 
means of the preaching of the Gospel, he now 
traces back to its ultimate author (ver. 20).— 
Now he which stablisheth us with you 
in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God. 
—lIn the first place he represents God as firmly 
establishing, so far as related to Christ (1 Cor. 
i. 6), not only those who preached the Gospel, 
but those who had been brought by them to the 
Christian faith. The former he had enabled to 
preach Christ in such a way as to deserve and 
to secure the confidence of their fellow-men; 
and the latter he had induced to exercise a 
steadfast faith, and to hold forth an unshaken 
confession of the truth. In the next place he 
presents God as anointing the Apostle and his 
assistants; that is, as bestowing upon them that 
spiritual inspiration which was needful for their 
duties. [There is certainly nothing in the mere 
language or grammatical construction which in- 
timates that he associated all Christians with 
these inspired teachers in the enjoyment of these 
blessings. Inthe confirmation (βεβαιῶν), indeed, 
he expressly includes the Corinthians to whom 
he was writing, and this is spoken of as an event 
which was then (present participle) taking place. 
But with an almost evident design he extends 
this participation to none of the remaining facts 
(the anointing, the sealing and the earnest of 
the Spirit), which are represented as having 
taken place (aorist participles) once for all at an 
earlier period (probably when the Apostles and 
the other teachers were consecrated to their pub- 
lic offices, and when, of course, the Corinthians 
were unconverted). As we know that miraculous 
gifts had been conferred upon the Corinthians, 
a special reason may have existed for applying 
the confirmation alone to them (σὺν ὑμῖν). And 
yet it must be conceded, that nothing in the na- 
ture of either of these benefits, so far as they are 
known to us, would necessarily limit their appli- 
cation to any class of believers. Even if the 
unction in 1 John ii. 20, 27 be explained of a 
miraculous endowment, it would be difficult to 
give such an interpretation to Eph. i. 138 f. Dr. 
Hodge also calls attention to the fact, that when 
an official anointing is spoken of in the New 
Testament, it is only in relation to Christ and 
never with reference to the Apostles or other 
preachers, whereas all believers are said to re- 
ceive the more ordinary unction of the Holy 
Spirit. The ancient expositors (Chrysostom, 
Theodoret and Ambrosiaster) attached much im- 
portance to this passage as a special description 
of the privileges of all believers as the anointed 
prophets, priests and kings of God. On the 
whole, although we must grant that the Apostle 
has expressly limited the anointing, the sealing 
and the earnest of the Spirit to himself and his 
fellow-laborers in their official capacity, and the 


24 THE SECOND EPISTLE 


confirmation to them and the Corinthians, we see 
nothing in the endowments themselves or in the 
analogy of similar passages, which should pre- 
yent us from giving these expressions a much 
more extensive application, since they refer to 
those spiritual benefits which are promised to all 
Christians as well as their public teachers. ] 
With respect to the anointing (xpicac), comp. 
Jno. ii. 20-27, where the unction of believers 
(xpioua) is spoken of; and Luke iy. 18; Acts iv. 
27; x. 88; Heb. i. 9. Preachers of the Gospel 
should be imitators of Christ, and this they can 
be only as they partake of the Divine Spirit 
(official grace).—The δὲ indicates that an addi- 
tional subject is introduced, for it is here meta- 
batic (or transitional), and not adversative. The 
phrase εἰς Χριστόν has in this place the sense of: 
in respect to Christ, or, in the direction of Christ, 
and not of: within or in Christ. The former 
signification is undoubtedly the simplest, but the 
representation of the Apostle requires that we 
should conceive of the union with Christ as a 
continuous and progressive one, and it may be 
doubted whether εἰς will bear such an interpre- 
tation. Σὺν ὑμῖν (with you) is used here, not 
merely to conciliate the good will of the readers 
(Meyer, Osiander), but it enters much more es- 
sentially into the course of the argument. W. 
F. Besser:—‘‘He takes the Corinthians them- 
selves for his witnesses, from their own experience, 
that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ makes 
the course of His people sure by the Holy Spirit.” 
—It would be altogether inappropriate and even 
contradictory to the spirit of the text to suppose 
that the Apostle had here a collateral reference 
to those who affected to regard him as a reed 
shaken by the wind (Riickert).—In the second 
and in the next succeeding ἡμᾶς the Apostle does 
not include his readers with himself, for in the 
previous part of the sentence he had expressly 
distinguished ἡμᾶς from them, and had made it 
refer exclusively to himself and his fellow- 
laborers.—The anointing refers not merely to 
the original vocation but to the subsequent 
spiritual endowment of the persons spoken of. 
The expression [paronomasia] intimates that 
there was a resemblance between the anointed 
ones and Him who was in a preéminent sense 
the Anointed One. Neanper: ‘ As it was cus- 
tomary to transfer every predicate of the Old 
Testament Theocracy, in a spiritual sense, to 
Christianity, we have the chrism which was used 
in the consecration of priests and kings applied 
to the spiritual consecration of the Christian by 
the presence of the Holy Spirit in his heart. The 
reference is to the consecration of all believers 
to the general priesthood.”’—It is rather an over- 
straining of the word when it is made (Bengel) 
to imply a communication both of strength and 
of fragrancy (chap. ii. 15); or, in addition to 
this, the clear and accurate discernment of truth, 
which was sometimes given from above, and 
which made its recipients inaccessible to all 
forms of error and falsehood (comp. 1 Jno. ii. 27); 
or some character indelibilis in the evangelical 
sense, a permanent Divine endowment by which 
one became holier and more inviolable, on ac- 
count of some special prerogative or dignity 
which he acquired as the Lord’s anointed (Osi- 
ander; comp. Ps. cy. 15); or, finally, the quality 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. ὁ 





—, 


imparted in the three-fold office, 7. 6., the ree 
freshing and cheering influence (Ps. xl. 15), which 
all Christians receive when they are made pro- 
phets, priests and kings unto God, and are 
strengthened for their conflicts with the world, 
sin and Satan (anointing of the athletae). Ver. 
21 can be correctly construed only as an indepen- 
dent sentence, of which ver. 22 was designed to 
give an additional explanation. If we take ver. 
21 as the subject and ver. 22 as the predicate, so 
that the idea should be: God who stablishes and 
hath anointed us hath also sealed us, the βεβαιῶν, 
which now forms the connecting link with the 
preceding passage, ceases to be the principal 
and becomes a merely incidental thought.—In 
ver. 22 the phrase—Who also hath sealed us 
—has reference to the Christian character of all 
those who had been ordained to the office of 
teaching, and points out the true source of those 
peculiar endowments which qualified them for 
their work. The sealing (σφραγίζεσϑαι) signifies 
in general the act by which a man designates 
something as his property. Here, as in Eph. i. 
13; iv. 30, it signifies that Divine assurance of 
adoption which is effected by the communication 
and inward witness of the Holy Spirit. Osian- 
der describes it as the complete consecration of 
one to the service and fellowship of the Lord and 
his uninterrupted continuance therein (comp. 
Rey. vii. 2; 2 Tim. ii. 10). The phrase—and 
hath given the earnest of the Spirit in 
our hearts—is here added epexegetically, for 
in this communication of the Spirit lies the true 
power of the sealing. The whole phrase is a 
brachylogy [a concise expression] in which the 
act and its result are taken together; for it is 
implied that the Spirit is in such a way given 
that he abides in the heart.—’ ῤῥαβών is pro- 
perly the earnest-money, 6. g., in a bargain, 
when some part of the price agreed upon is paid 
beforehand, in token that the contract is ratified 
and that the purchaser is bound for the payment 
of the whole. It is therefore a pledge or se- 
curity.* If we take the genitive (τοῦ πνεΐ ματος) 
partitively, the sense will be, that a communica- 
tion of the Spirit is begun, and that the portion 
given is a pledge that the communication will be 
completed hereafter. If we follow the analogy 





[* The original word here used (and which is found in the 
New Testament only here. and in 2 Cor. y. 5, and Eph. i. 14) 
is one of the few Hebrew words which passed into the Greek 
and Latin lauguages. ΑΒ the founders of ancient commerce 
in the West, the Phenicians introduced it among the Greeks 
(ἀῤῥαβών, from whom it passed into Italy (arrhabo, arrha), 
Gaul (Fr. arrhes), and even Ergland (Earl's, or more pro- 
perly, Arle’s money). The Sept. use the same Greek word 


for Paw in Gen. xxxviii. 17, 18, 20, and yet it appears 
J, 


to have had a meaning in Greek somewhat distinguishable 
from that which it bore either in Hebrew or in other lan- 
guages. In these it had the general signification of pledge 
(Gen. xxxvili. 17 ff.), surety (Proy. xvii. 18), and even host- 
ages, (2 Kings xiv. 14). The Greek derivative seems to have 
been restrained to signify only the deposit or part payment 
(Hesych, πρόδρομα) which the purchaser made to the vender 
on taking possession of his property (Suidas, Lexicon). Τὸ 
was therefore identical in kind with the payment which 
was due, whereas other kinds of pledges might be somethin 
of a totally different nature. Blackstone notices the Inga 
significance of an earnest, as a payment which places the 
buyer and the seller in a position to enforce the carrying 
out of the contract. (Comm. ii. 30). Comp. also Robertson 
(Lect. XXXV.), who points out that “ Baptism is a pledge of 
heayen—‘a sign and seal’—while the Spirit of truth is an 
earnest of heaven, and heaven begun.” Smith’s and Kitto’s 
Dictt. Art. Earnest; Robivson’s Heb. Lexicon}. 


“ Σ 


CHAP. I. 12-24. 





of chap. vy. 5, we must regard the communication 
of the Spirit as the proper warrant for expecting 
a complete salvation, the actual inheritance (the 
KAnpovouia). The Spirit therefore should be 
looked upon as the earnest of the whole salva- 
tion; properly speaking, the earnest is, or con- 
sists of, the Holy Spirit, and the genitive here is 
one of apposition [Winer, Gr. d. N. T. 2 48, 2]. 
Comp. on this subject Rom. viii. 2, 10-11, 15-17. 
It seems altogether too contracted a view of this 
passage to make all that is here said refer exclu- 
sively to the testimony which the Spirit bore in 
the hearts of the original preachers of the Gospel 
to the truth of their official character. [The ex- 
pressions more properly relate to the complete as- 
surance which they possessed that they were, both 
as believers and as preachers of the truth, under 
the direction of an infallible Divine Spirit. ] 
Vers. 23, 24. In the two preceding verses, the 
Apostle had set forth the firm basis God had 
given for the confidence his hearers might repose 
in him, and in consequence of which he had been 
so abundantly authenticated both as an Apostle 
and a Christian, This had prepared the way for 
the appeal to God which he now makes with an 
irresistible power:—Moreover I call God 
for a witness against my soul.—This isa 
solemn affirmation respecting his failure to visit 
Corinth according to his previous intention and 
the reasons which kept him from going. In- 
stead of the general ws, he now uses the singular 
1, because he is about to speak of personal mat- 
ters in which no one but himself was involved. 
The prominence of the ἐγὼ is increased by its 
close connection with δὲ (comp. Osiander: [‘* As 
God had placed a divine seal upon him and his 
word, according to ver. 22, so he now seals his 
own word with the name of God.’]) Ἐπί has 
its peculiar sense of against, Meyer makes it 
mean for (comp. 2 Maccab. ii. 37), but here it 
means in respect to; Neander: over my soul. 
The former sense is more appropriate to the 
nature of a solemn affirmation or oath (comp. 
Josh. xxiv. 22), The sense is: “If what I now 
say is untrue, may God appear as a witness 
against my soul, and may I fall under his con- 


demnation.”, —The condition was necessarily 


implied and hence was not expressed. The 
phrase, my soul (τὴν ἐμὴν ψυχήν) does not apply 
to the inmost spirit, that which the Apostle al- 
ways regarded as especially akin to, and con- 
scious of, God, and which he therefore places 
here in this sacred relation to. the Omniscient 
God (Osiander). According to Beck (Scelenl. ὃ 
2) the soul is that in which the life is found, and 
hence is always named as the subject when a 
preservation, deliverance, peril or loss oft life is 
spoken of.—This solemn asseveration was: justi- 


fiable on moral grounds, because his credit as an 


Apostle had been called in: question, and with 
this was essentially connected the honor of Christ 
who had sent him, and the cause of God which 
he represented at Corinth. In like manner, Gal. 
i. 20; Rom. ix. 1f, and other places. W. F. 
Besser: Even Augustine, in his day, refers: to 
this solemn oath of the Apostle, to prove that 
our Lord could not have intended in his Sermon 
on the Mount (Matth. v. 84) to prohibit every 
kind of swearing, but only those oaths which 
were useless and were an unhallowed profanation 





25 





of God’s name, and hence were arbitrary and 
uncalled for. In this place Paul made use of an 
oath, as Christ did (Matth. xxvi. 64), when the 
honor of God called for it.—Ovxér: implies that 
he had been in Corinth before he wrote his First. 
Epistle (comp. Meyer). [Our A. V. translates. 
οὐκέτι as if it Were—=ov7w; TYNDALE, more cor- 
rectly: “not eny moare;” CoNYBEARE: ‘I gave 
up my purpose;” AxLrorp: ‘* Nomore, ἢ, 6.) after: 
the first time.” Paul does not deny that he had as. 
yet been at Corinth, but only explains why he had 
not gone thereat the time, and on the journey, of 
which he was speaking. It seems probable from: 
this whole passage (vers. 15-23) that Paul had. 
paid no visit to Corinth between the sending of the: 
First and Second Epistles. See Introd. ς᾽ 6.].. 
The reason he had not gone directly to Corinth,. 
according to his earlier intention, but had visited! 
the Macedonian churches first and had contentedi 
himself with writing to the Corinthians, is: ex- 
pressed in φειδόμενος ὑμῶν :--- πα Ὁ I came not: 
to Corinth any more, in order that I might 
spare you.—He had hoped that they would be: 
induced by that Epistle to return: to their right 
mind and would be so completely restored to their- 
proper relation to him, that he would not be: 
obliged to treat them with a rod of severity (1 

Cor. iv. 21). He was not, however, even: then: 
without anxiety on this point (chap. xii. 20f; 

xilil. 1ff.)—Not that we have dominion 
over your faith (ver. 24).—He here anticipates 
and meets any misconstruction which might be 
put upon what he had just said about sparing: 
them (¢ecdéuevoc),.and he obviates the appearance 
of domineering which some might find in it.— 
Οὐχ ὅτε is equivalent to saying: I say not that etc. 

(a common. brachylogy), z. 6., ‘‘the words φειδό- 

μενος ὑμῶν are not intended to imply,” ete.—Kupi- 
evouwev is not here to be so connected with ὑμῶν 

as to make évexa necessary to be understood be- 

fore τῆς πίστεως [as if he had meant: over you: 
with respect to your faith]; nor is τῆς πίστεως to 
be considered as equivalent to τῶν πιστευόντων : 

them, that believe. His object was to say that 
when he spoke of sparing them, he meant not to. 
use his apostolic authority in a lordly way to. 
control their faith, their inward religious life, 

and their spiritual action with respect to Chris- 
tian truth. All this he knew must be the result 
of a free surrender, and a voluntary determina- 
tion, of their own minds, not merely at first, but 
ever afterwards, on each renewed act of faith. 

A positive expression of his meaning is given in. 
the words:—but are helpers of your joy.—. 
‘Your joy, your ‘‘rejoicing in the Lord,” can 
thrive and maintain its existence only by your: 
putting forth all the energies of your faith in the- 
work of progressive sanctification, in abstaining: 
from all selfish and fleshly desires, and in the per-- 
fecting yourselves in love and a positive likeness: 
to Christ.’ In this way not only would their faith. 
be proved, but their hearts would be filled with: 
Christian cheerfulness, and they would become: 
conscious of a genuine and established spiritual. 
life. In all this he had endeavored to assist them. 
by the exercise of discipline, by earnest admoni- 
tions, by a strict adherence to the upright course 
which a genuine love demanded, and by strenu. 
ously persevering in the path of duty, whatever 
censures he might find it needful to inflict on 


20 





them for their remaining inconsistencies. [As 
inspired men the Apostles had power to prescribe 
what ought to be believed, the objective truth on 
which all right faith is grounded, but they 
claimed no other authority over men’s subjective 
faith. ‘*He claimed no right to control their 
spiritual convictions, but only their outward 
conduct, and hence he might speak of having 
spared them only in respect of external discip- 
line” (Erasmus’ Paraphrase). Thus careful was 
he to recognize the right of private judgment 
even under the spiritual jurisdiction of inspired 
men. The reason he gives is, that Christians 
were steadfast only when they exercise a free 
faith in God alone, without the attempted con- 
straint of human authority.] The σύν in συνεργοί 
refers neither to God nor to Christ, nor to his 
companions in office, as if he had said that he 
worked in common with them, but to his readers 
for whose welfare he was concerned, and whose 
activity in their own behalf was presupposed. 
That he was here speaking of nothing but a co- 
operation with them in promoting their joy (in 
this sense) and not directly of faith, is confirmed 
by the final clause :—for by faith ye stand,—or 
rather, in respect to faith ye are steadfast. The 
Dative here shows wherein or in what respect 
they were steadfast (comp. Gal. v. 3), and does 
not point out [as our English A. V. makes it] 
the reason, or the efficient cause of their stead- 
fastness. [See, however, Winer, Gr. d. NV. 7., ἢ 
31, 3]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. How pure the relationship between minis- 
ters and their congregations, when the eye of 
the former is kept steadfastly upon the day of 
Jesus Christ, and when the latter attend strictly 
to the doctrine preached to them. The thought 
that we are both to appear together before the 
great Shepherd to whom we all belong, who has 
united us together, and who perfectly knows all 
that we do to one another, will have the effect, 
1) to repress in those who have been intrusted 
with the pastoral office all motives unworthy of 
fellowship with God, to render them indifferent 
to the empty honors of the world and to fleshly 
indulgences, and to make them long with purer 
and more intense desire for the salvation of souls, 
to whom they might be able in the last day to 
point with satisfaction as those whom they had 
been instrumental in leading to, and confirming 
in, the way of life; and 2) to induce the people to 
make such a profitable use of their instructions 
and admonitions, to grow in grace, to free them- 
selves from every thing which will not bear the 
light of the last day, and to abound in the fruits 
of righteousness, that their ministers may per- 
form their duties with joy and not with grief, 
and finally be able to point to them as to a 
thriving and fruitful field which will not dishonor 
either the great Master or the under shepherds. 
—But the formation and continuance of this re- 
lation must depend very much upon the charac- 
ter of the instruction which is given. When a 
people are supplied only with opinions derived 
from the preacher’s own heart or the teachings 
of men, they can never know with confidence 


where they stand or the true foundation of their 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


oe 


hopes. But when they are supplied with the 
pure Gospel of Jesus Christ in the ever consist- 
ent words of the Apostles and prophets, and with 
those promises of God which, however ancient, 
are perpetually fulfilled and confirmed before 
their eyes and in their own experience, they 
will always know where to look for direction, 
will be established in the truth, and will acquire 
a confidence which no insinuations or calumnies 
can shake. As his course will never be ambigu- 
ous, they will not be obliged to be on their guard 
against every thing which proceeds from him, 
his words will be received in their natural signi- 
fication, and if at any time suspicions are raised 
against him, they will confidently anticipate from 
him a satisfactory explanation. 

2. The proper relation of a pastor to his peo- 
ple is not that of a lord over his subjects. It is 
no part of his business to interfere directly with 
their external social relations, to lord it over 
their private judgments in respect to God and 
the Divine word, or to hold them in a state of 
slavish dependence upon himself. A hierarchy 
is an apostasy from the mind and spirit of the 
Apostles. These felt that their office was most 
honored when they became helpers of their peo- 
ple’s joy, extended a helping hand to such as 
were weak and struggling, and enabled these to 
walk securely along the way of righeousness. 
Their object was to render believers more and 
more capable of using God’s word and grace for 
themselves, and to become increasingly skilful 
and zealous in good works. Their official power 
depended not upon external accompaniments, 
but upon the amount of assistance and codpera- 
tion they could afford to those around them. It 
was the power of love and a participation in the 
sufficiency of God. Of such a hierarchy, those 
who love to have dominion over men’s faith pre- 
sent only a miserable caricature, and an apish 
device of Satan, who endeavors thus haughtily 
and violently to recover what our Lord and 
those who have our Lord’s Spirit have gained by 
works of humanity and love. Such ministers 
boast themselves only in that God who establishes 
them with all true believers in one great fellow- 
ship with Christ, calls them and qualifies them 
for their office, and bestows on them the Spirit 
which witnesses to their adoption and is an in- 
ward pledge of their eternal glory. 

[8. “The joys of a Christian on earth are of 
the same nature with the joys of heaven. They 
are an earnest, a part of that which he is to en- 
joy forever. There will be no other heaven than 
that which would be constituted by the expanded 
joys of a Christian. Of course, he who has not 
such a character, such principles, and such joys, 
as, if fairly developed, would constitute heaven, 
is not a Christian.” Barnes. ] 

4. ‘If the inspired Apostles recognized not 
only their subjection to the word of God, but 
also the right of the people to judge whether 
their teachings were in accordance with the 
supreme standard, it is most evident that ne 
Church authority can make any thing gontrary 
to Scripture obligatory on believers, an that the 
ultimate right to decide whether ec¢lesiastical 
decisions are in accordance with ‘(he word of 
God, rests with the people. Im other words, 
Paul recognizes even in referetyce to himself the 


CHAP. I. 12-24, 





right of private judgment. He allowed any man 
to pronounce him anathema if he did not preach 
the Gospel as it had been revealed and authenti- 
cated to the Church.” Hones. ] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarxe, Ver. 12: HepinceR:—What an excel- 
lent pillow for the soul is a good conscience! 
Well may we seek for it, purify it, and keep it! 
An indispensable means to this, is never to ne- 
glect the duties of our stations.—With a good 
conscience, simplicity and sincerity are cardinal 
virtues by which, no less than by faith, all virtu- 
ous conduct is ennobled.—He who has the witness 
of a good conscience, thereby lives continually at 
the bar of that omniscient Judge, who tries the 
reins and the heart. (Rom. ix. 1). Nothing 
tranquilizes a man under manifold sufferings, 
like the consciousness that he brought not his 
troubles on himself; but even when he is con- 
scious of some defects, the grace of God will 
sustain him if he is engaged in a good cause; and 
is suffering, not on account of those defects, but 
for Christ’s sake.—Ver. 13. A Christian’s speech 
should never be ambiguous or distorted (Ps. xxv. 
21; John i. 47).—The great matter is, to be 
faithful even to the end; but it is a sad thing to 
be perhaps faithful to-day, and to-morrow to be 
like salt which has lost its savor (Matth. y. 13), 
relapsing into entire worldliness (Heb. x. 38f.). 
—Ver. 14. Many despise and hate the preacher 
who is faithful, and yet fancy that they love God, 
but the time is coming when the preacher will 
be honored, and they will be put to shame (Luke 
xix. 16)!—Happy is it when the minister and 
his people have reason for mutual glorying, but 
alas! when he is obliged to labor in the midst 
of perpetual sighings (Heb. xiii. 17)!—Ver. 
16. Even when we have the sincerest and best in- 
tentions, our whole conduct may be misinterpreted 
and ascribed to base motives. But go thy way, 
perverse world; thou shalt yet see and confess the 
truth, though perhaps too late!—Ver. 19. The 
Church has now many builders; oh, if all would 
build on the same plan and would hold up the 
Lord Jesus Christ in the same way! But with 
some it is yea, and with others it is nay; some 
pull down what others build up.—Ver. 20. Jesus 
Christ is the seal and the realization of all God’s 
promises and predictions. In him we have the 
manifestation of God.—Ver. 21. To be called the 
Lord’s anointed, and yet not have the Lord’s 
anointing, is to have a name to live while we 
are dead.—A genuine Christian stands upon a 
firm footing, and has no reason to doubt, much 
less to despair, that God will enable him to hold 
out faithful to the end; for the Holy Spirit which 
dwells within him, is the pledge of his establish- 
ment, anointing and sealing by the Father.—The 
Holy Spirit is the precious love token* which 
God gives his people that Christ may be glorified 
in them, and to shed abroad the love of God in 
their hearts, diffusing in them a peace (Rom. v. 
5) which assures them of an inheritance of simi- 
lar blessedness in the world to come.—Ver. 23. 


[Ὁ Maalschatz, is the gift which is presented to the bride 
at her betrothal, by her affianced spouse, as a pledge that he 
will at some future time bring her to his home]. 








27 
On important occasions, when the honor of God 
and the welfare of our neighbor is concerned, we 
are warranted in taking a solemn oath (Deut. vi. 
13).—Ver. 24. Faith cannot be forced. Fetters 
and chains are the instruments which antichrist 
uses for instructing his followers and for en- 
suring his decisions in the hall of judgment.— 
Nothing can exceed the joy which true Chris- 
tians derive from the pledge God gives them of 
their glorious inheritance by sealing them for it. 
All true servants of the gospel are helpers of this 
joy, and never will imagine themselves the peo- 
ple’s lords (1 Pet. iii. 8).—Those who truly stand 
in the faith will also withstand the enemy (1 Pet. 
v. 8f.). But let him that thinketh he standeth, 
take heed lest he fall (1 Cor. x. 12; Rom. xi. 
20). 

BeRLENBURG ΒΙΒΙΕ, Ver. 12:—A minister of 
Christ must look mainly to the approbation of 
his own conscience, for he will be obliged to live 
as if he cared nothing for the opinions of worldly 
men.—All things in this case have a mutual de- 
pendence; the simplicity of the dove is united 
with the prudence of the righteous, and with an 
understanding so purified from above that it will 
receive or endure nothing corrupt or incongruous 
in its nature. The eyes are turned always to- 
ward God as He is in Christ, and the whole con- 
duct is regulated by the Divine will. This 18 
walking by faith. In it the believer will not be 
disposed to get up intrigues, and will have ne 
occasion for doubt or fear. Like charity (1 Cor. 
xiii. 4) he has none of the serpent’s spirit, and 
he keeps constant hold on God. He walks in 
the light, and he has no corrupt by-ends, for his 
eye is single. Did we all walk thus we might 
traverse the world without injury.—Ver. 18 ff. 
No reproof is so severe as the words and the ex- 
ample of consistent Christians. The faithful 
minister will, therefore, be always in conflict 
with men. We need never expect to be without 
some root of bitterness and suspicion.—Ver. 17. 
The distinction between those whom God leads, 
and those who walk according to their own coun- 
sel, may be seen in the steadfastness with which 
the former keep, and the fickleness with which 
the latter change, their resolutions. The stabi- 
lity of the Christian depends upon the immuta- 
bility of that Divine Spirit who leads him, and 
who will allow of no Yea and Nay in Him. 
Those who have not that Spirit will be subject 
continually to change, resolving sometimes upon 
one thing and sometimes upon another, but con- 
stant to nothing.—Ver. 19. In Christ and His 
gospel there are no contradictions. What He is 
in himself, He will manifest himself to be in us, 
ever the same. Such will he prove himself to be 
in all those temptations which we sinners must 
endure with patience.— Ver. 20. God’s promises 
are all connected with Christ. Those then who 
heartily lay hold of Christ can easily overcome 
and make their way through all possible offences. 
—Ver. 21. Our eye should be fixed not so much 
upon the instruments God uses, as upon the work 
He accomplishes by them.—Ver. 22. By the seal- 
ing which God gives us, we become so assured of 
His promises and of the salvation effected by 
Christ and revealed in the gospel, that no 
creature can separate us from Him.—Ver. 24. 
Whoever imposes burdens upon the necks and 


28 





endeavors to have dominion over the faith and 
consciences of God’s people, thereby puts him- 
self in the place of Christ and becomes an anti- 
christ. 

Rieger, Vers. 12-16:—The reproach of the 
cross has always something oppressive and 
crushing toa man. Then those who see him will 
write upon his cross all manner of superscrip- 
tions. But then it is that we may make our 
boast and stand erect with a right royal and di- 
vine spirit. This is not self-exaltation, but in 
our troubles glorying in the Lord. Such a faith 
which glories in fellowship with Christ and in 
His righteousness alone, arms us against the ac- 
cusations of conscience, and yet so purifies con- 
science itself that it will allow of nothing which 
would interrupt our fellowship with a God of 
light. It will make us diligent to maintain a 
good conscience along with our faith, that its 
friendly testimony may be our rejoicing under 
the unfriendly judgments of men.—The man who 
faithfully performs the work assigned him by 
Providence, and never corrupts himself with 
sinister and selfish views, may be said to act 
with simplicity and sincerity. As it is in the di- 
vine government, every thing here proceeds from 
asingle principle. The Christian may be severely 
tried, but he will always be an object of divine 
complacency. Confidence in himself will some- 
times beguile a man into expedients of a worldly 
nature, into subtle schemes and strenuous en- 
deavors to obtain relief, but a true confidence in 
the living God will support him all along his 
course with the assurance that grace will be 
sufficient for his day, and that all things shall 
work together for his good. He will have no 
need of concealments, corrections of former er- 
rors, double meanings to his words, and forced 
explanations of what he has done, but his honest 
meaning is what every one would easiest under- 
stand it to be.—Ver. 17 ff. Nothing can be no- 
bler than the common fellowship of all Chris- 
tians in the gospel, but nothing can be more 
disgusting than a perversion of it to promote ob- 
jects of a worldly nature. The purer a man’s 
intentions are, the more unsuspecting will he be, 
and the more freely will he adjust his course to 
new circumstances. While, on the one hand, a 
worldly spirit in its eagerness to maintain its in- 
fluence over men, will not unfrequently persevere 
with fatal obstinacy in the course it has once 
chosen, a light mind, on the other, changes its 
purposes without reasons. A proper regard for 
the guiding hand of God will preserve us from 
both extremes.—Even in his primary principles 
no one should presume that he can attain by 
himself infallible truth. God will, however, 
faithfully see to it that we have enough in his 
word to restupon. The Gospe] is no mere play- 
thing, which asserts at one time what it denies 
at another, and which approves at one time what 
it condemns at another; but as it proceeds from 
an unchangeable source, it presents always the 
same warrant for faith.—Ver. 20. The whole 
mystery of God and of Christ has been contrived, 
80 far as we are concerned, with the special ob- 
ject of giving us promises amply sufficient to af- 
ford us perfect peace; but all these promises 
find their fulfilment in Christ and in the accom- 
plishment of this divine mystery. It is by the 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
πε I IE ek αε ΞΘ Θ ΘΒ ῃᾳ ῃψΞ᾿Ξ-5- 





.------ 


work of redemption that God has preserved His 
own name from dishonor and vindicated His 
glory in creation; and when He sends forth men 
to preach His Gospel, it is that they may make 
known the glory of God in the face of Jesus 
Christ.—Ver. 21 f. Christ the Son of God hag 
arranged all things in such a way as to promote 
His Father’s glory; but the Father, as the true 
Husbandman, 
Christ, that it shall be purified and bring forth 
more fruit. He is the source of all the assu- 
rance and certainty, and of all the joy and con- 
stancy, which as Christians and ministers, we can 
possess.—Ver. 22. A father sometimes averts his 
eyes from that which may causetoo much shameon 
the part of a well-disposed child.—Ver. 24. Mat- 
ters of faith and of ecclesiastical order must not 
be subject to men’s caprices, and changed ac- 
cording to the convenience of kings or subjects. 
(Matth. xx. 25, 26). 

Hevener, VER. 12.—The only condition on 
which we can claim the intercession of our fellow 
Christians or speak in our own behalf, is the 
possession of a pure conscience. This can exist 
only where there is a simplicity which has but 
one aim and one desire, 7. ¢., to please God, a 
divine sincerity or purity of purpose which re- 
nounces all selfish and extraneous objects, and 
an uprightness which can bear the divine in- 
spection.—Ver. 13. The Christian is always con- 
sistent with himself.—Ver. 15. The honorable, 
conscientious man can present himself even be- 
fore his enemies with cheerfulness. —Ver. 17. 
The Christian should be prudent and conscien- 
tious when he promises, that he may never en- 
gage to do more than he can perform.-—An 
honest man is consistent with himself even when 
he changes his plans, for in all his changes he 
has no selfish ends.—Ver. 19. Christ himself is an 
example of a witness, absolutely faithful, upright 
and reliable (Rey. iii. 14).—What can impose a 
stronger obligation to speak the truth, than to 
be the messenger of such a faithful and true wit- 
ness? Those who have constant intercourse with 
Christ, and in whom Christ dwells, must surely 
be expected to have something of His truthfulness 
and fidelity.—Ver. 20. Christ has honored God’s 
veracity. Every one, then, who brings another 
to Christ, contributes something to the glory of 
God’s veracity.—Ver. 21f. Stability of character 
is a grace which belongs to those who are up- 
right and pious in heart, to those who humbly 
and firmly maintain confidence in God.—It is the 
anointing of the Spirit which makes us Chris- 
tians.—Like every other creature, the Christian 
has his distinctive signature (mark). The Spi- 
rit, the pledge of divine grace and of adoption, 
is the invisible stamp which every one must 
bear.—Ver. 24. The Apostles would not for a 
moment have dominion over men’s faith, how 
much less should those who act only as their re- 
presentatives? Every Christian should be led 
by the Spirit freely through the divine word.— 
The Apostles imparted to others nothing but 
Christ’s own word, and the Spirit had to confirm 
it in their hearts. 

W. F. Besser, Ver. 12. A Christian may have 
confidence in the testimony of his conscience, for 
the eye of his conscience is direeted by the Holy 
Ghost to the clear and faithful glass of the divine 


watches over each branch in © 


CHAPSI 1-11, 


29 


a .-.-----Ὸῇ-ς-ς-ς-ς-’-’--------- 


will in the heart. (Rom. ix. 1).—Ver. 13.-The 
Scriptures evidently teach us that holy men of 
God have not concealed their thoughts among 
the written letters, but plainly expressed them 
in intelligible words.—Ver. 18. How could we 
know God’s faithfulness and veracity, if not by 
means of what prophets and Apostles have told 
us? Through their writings which are not yea 
and nay, but are in their essential nature only a 
single word, the Church isa pillar and ground 
of the truth (1 Tim. iii. 15), the faithful witness 
of a faithful God, and the spotless Bride of the 
spotless Lamb.—Ver. 19. Christ is not a reed 
shaken with the wind, but a rock. From the 
mouth of our Lord Jesus Christ, no poor sinner 
ever heard a yea of promise at the same time 
with anay of denial. Justas He was when He stood 
among His disciples and said (Jno. xiv. 6): Iam 
the truth, so is He to-day, and will be forever; 
the preached Christ identical with the preacher 
Christ.—Jesus Christ the Son of God is the sub- 
stance of all prophetic and apostolic announce- 
ments, the very heart and kernel of the whole 
word of God; He who has come in the flesh is 
undoubtedly the one who was promised in the 
word of prophecy. —Ver. 24. Faith cannot be 
extorted by force or by authority. 

[F. W. Ropertson, ver. 12:—The testimony of 
conscience. Paul is here speaking, not of the 
faultlessness of his personal character, but of his 
ministry—not of the blamelessness even of this, 
but of its success; he had been earnest and 
straightforward in his work, and his worst ene- 
mies could not prove him insincere. This sin- 








indirect modes of teaching, which, in the end, 
seldom succeed. Such straightforwardness is 
more than a match at last for all the involved 
windings of deceit ; 2) all teaching on the ground 
of mere authority. The truth he taught com- 
mended itself to men’s consciences, and made them 
feel a flash which kindled all into ligkt at once 
Of his words men said, not, ‘How can that be 
proved?’ but, ‘It is the truth of God, and needs 
no proof.’—Ver. 15-22. Paul defends himself 
from the charge that he had trified with his 
word, on the broad ground that, as a spiritual 
Christian, he could not do so. It would have 
been acting according to the flesh, whereas he 
was in Christ; and Christ was the Christian’s 
yea, the living truth, and so his life. To be ve- 
racious was therefore simply the result of a true. 
life: the life being true, the words and senti- 
ments must be veracious. To be established in 
Christ, anointed, is to be free from self and self- 
ish motives. A blow is therefore struck at the 
root of all instability. The course of such a 
man, like that of the sun, can be calculated. 
Observe, too, that all this arose, not from his 
Apostleship, but from the Christianity, which 
the Corinthians shared with him. It was the 
gift of the Spirit, which was ‘‘God’s seal” to 
mark him for God’s own, and an ‘ earnest” 
which assured him of his future glory. The 
true are His, and none else are blessed. We 
need not ask, therefore: Will the true, pure, 
loving, holy man be saved? for he 7s saved, he 
has heaven, itisin him now. He has a part of 
his inheritance now, and he is soon to possess 


cerity excluded, 1) all subtle manceuvering and | the whole]. 


IV.—MORE PARTICULAR EXPLANATIONS OF HIS REASONS FOR NOT VISITING THEM; 
THAT HE MIGHT SPARE THEM AND HIMSELF NEEDLESS PAIN. DIRECTIONS 
WITH RESPECT TO THOSE WHO HAD ESPECIALLY CAUSED TROUBLE. 


Cuaprer II. 1-11. 


But I determined this with [for] myself, that I would not come again to you in hea- 
viness [in sorrow come again to you]... For if I make you sorry, who is he then* that 


[om. unto you'], lest when I came I should have sorrow from them of whom 1 ought 


1 
2 
3 maketh me glad, but the same which is made sorry by me? And I wrote this same 
4 


to rejoice ; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. 


For out of 


much affliction and anguish of heart [ wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye 
should be grieved [have sorrow], but that ye might know the love which I have more 


abundantly unto you. 


Θ ὦ ONS δι 


But if any have caused grief [sorrow], he hath not grieved 
[caused sorrow to] me, but in part, (that I may not overcharge [him]) you all. 
Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. 
So that contrariwise ye ought rather [om. rather*] to forgive him and comfort him, 
lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I 
beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. For to this end also did I 
write, that I might know the proof of you. whether’ ye be obedient in all things. 


To 


whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also®: for if I forgave any thing, to whom 
[whatever] I forgave it [om, it], for your sakes forgave I it, in the person [presence] 


devices. 


of Christ; lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his 


80 





Ἢ 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





1 Ver. 1.—The arrangement of the words, should be, according to the best MSS.: ἐν λύπῃ ἐλθεῖν. The Rec. on less 


“Meyer: 


“almost no”) authority has ἐλθεῖν ἐν λύπῃ. The best authorities also put πρὸς ὑμᾶς before ἐλθεῖν. 


Tisch. still 


adheres to: ἐν λύπῃ ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, and he is sustained by Ὁ, E. F.G. the Ital. Vulg. Syr. and Goth. vss., Chrys. and 
Theophyl. and most of the Lat. fathers. Nearly every recent critic has adopted the order: ἐν λύπη ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς. [There 


appears 
ric words, 


to be no sufficient reason why λύπη and λυπεῖν should not be rendered into English uniformly by the same gene- 
as is contended for by Stanley (p. XXI.) and the editors of the Bible Union. 


In the eight tiines in which those 


words occur in our section, our A. Y. has the different English words “in heaviness,” “sorrow,” grief, etc.] 


2 Ver. 2.—The best authorities have no ἐστιν after tis. 


It was added by a later hand. [Only Bloomfield, among 


later critics. defends it both on documentary and internal evidence. He contends that the idiom and the interrogative use 


of καὶ demands a verb or its equivalent. ] 


3 Ver. 3.—The best authorities have also cancelled ὑμῖν after ἔγραψα [but Bloomfield defends it as less likely to have 


been interpolated where it is found, than to have fallen out where it is wanting.] 
4 Ver. 7.—In tbe best MSS. μᾶλλον is wanting, and in others it stands after ὑμᾶς. 


It is a gloss upon τοὐναντίον. [And 


yet it is found in C. K. L. and Sinait. the Vulg. the Peschito Syr. Chrys. Theodt. Damasc. Theophyl. Oecum. and other 
MSS.: and it is inserted by Tisch., Stanley, and Meyer. The latter thinks it was omitted on account of its apparent super- 


fiuity.] 


ὃ Ver. 9.—Lachmann following A. B. has ἣ instead of ei. The et might easily have fallen out before eis (both are want- 


ing in one MS. [of the 11th cent.]) and was then supplied in various ways. (One MS. [also of the 11th cent.] has ὡς.) 
6 Ver. 10.—The best authorities have ὃ κεχάρισμαι, εἴ Te κεχάρισμαι. Rec. has εἴ τι κεχάρισμαι, ᾧ κεχάρισμαι. Meyer 
thinks that εἴ τι κεχάρ. was left out on account of the occurrence of κεχάρ. twice (in several MSS. it is found wanting), and 


then that it was reinserted in difierent positions. 


EXEGETICAL AND ORITICAL. 


Vers. 1-4. Having given the reason which had 
prevented his visit to the Corinthians (viz.: that 
he might spare them, φειδόμενος ὑμῶν, chap. i. 
23), the Apostle now proceeds to inform them 
that. one reason for thus sparing them was for 
his own sake.—But I determined this for 
my own sake.—The dé indicates simply an ad- 
vance in the course of the argument. Kopivecr is 
here used as it is in 1 Cor. ii. 2; vii. 37 [in the 
sense of: to determine, to form a decision]. The 
meaning of ἐμαυτῷ is not here [as in the Luth. 
and all the Eng. versions]: with myself, for then 
the words should have been rap’ ἐμαυτῷ; but 
it is rather the dat. commodi: for my own sake; 
‘ta, thoughtful, affectionate turn of expression”’ 
Meyer. Τοῦτο is emphatic and anticipates 
that which immediately follows, and which is ep- 
exegetical or explanatory of it (comp. Rom. xiv. 
13 et. al—That I would not again come to 
you in sorrow).—The πάλιν belongs to the 
whole phrase: in sorrow come to you, and not 
merely to the verb ο come independently of the 
words in sorrow. Critics have been led to this 
violent removal of the word from its natural con- 
nection by their unwillingness to concede that 
the Apostle had made a second journey to Corinth 
before writing this Epistle (comp. chap. is 15). 
Neanver: “Paul intended to say that he would 
not a second time in sorrow come to them. But 
when had he been with them the first time in sor- 
row? Such a phrase could hardly be applicable 
to his first residence at Corinth. We must there- 
fore believe that Paul had been a second time 
in that city, and that many sad things had then 
taken place there. We shall be obliged to accept 
of Bleek’s explanation, that Paul had made one 
journey to Corinth not only before the Epistle to 
the Corinthians, which stands first in our canon, 
but another before writing our Epistle, which 
must have heen actually first written, but which 
has been lost.” [Comp. what is said of this 
second visit in the Introd., 3 6]. We must also 
conclude from what follows, in the second verse, 
“for if I make you sorrowful’’—that the 
sorrow here referred to must have been a sorrow 
of the Corinthians and not of the Apostle himself 
nor one shared by both parties. To come in 
Sorrow, then, was to bring with him that which 
should cause sorrow (comp. Rom. xy. 29, and ἐν 





ῥάβδω ἐλϑεῖν, 1 Cor. iv. 21).*—Who is he then 
that maketh me glad but the same whois 
made sorry by me ?—The καί in the beginning 
of the apodosis or the concluding clause of ver. 
2, is remarkable; and the connection of this sen- 
tence with the protasis which precedes it is not 
easy to be determined. Many have therefore 
concluded that we have here an aposiopesis, and 
that the Apostle, led off by his strong emotion, 
suddenly breaks off from his previous sentence 
and commences here a new interrogatiye sen- 
tence. The sense then would be: he gould not 
think of giving them pain, for that would be un- 
grateful and unkind, since he would thus give 
pain to those who were giving him joy. In such 
a case, however, the expression ought to have 
been: καὶ τίς ὁ λυπούμενος ἐξ ἐμοῦ, εἰ μὴ ὁ εὐφραίνων 
με: who is he then that is made sorrowful by me, 
but the one who makes me glad? We not unfre- 
quently meet with καί before the concluding clause 
(apodosis) of aconditional propositioninthe works 
of the epic poets, in order to indicate that both 
transactions mentioned take place at precisely 
the same time (comp. Passow, sub voce καί, p. 
1539 a. [Jelf, 3 759, 2]). It might be translated 
[as in our Eng. vers.], then, and the sense would 
be: there would be then no one to make me glad, 
ete. He intends to say that both things could 
not be at the same time, that he could not be 
making them sad while they were making him 
glad. The absurdity of expecting that they 
would then make him joyful is made still more 
evident by the phrase, εἰ μὴ ὁ λυπούμενος ἐξ ἐμοῦ: 
“he must be the very one who is made sad by 
me.” If I, your spiritual father, make you sor- 
rowful, I thus deprive myself of the joy which 





ΓΕ Althongh our author’s construction of λύπη actively 
(: causing grief) is sanctioned by a number of ancient (espe- 
cially Chrysostom) and modern crities, it is certainly not the 
natural meaning of the word, and is utterly inappropriate in 
the remainder of this section, and in ether parts of Panl’s 
writings. We much prefer that of the majority of inter- 
preters, which makes the sense of vers. 2 and 3 to be: “I 
determined not to come to you again in sorrow; and there- 
fore I refrained from visiting you at a time in which I 
should have been obliged to inflict on you a chastisement 
which would have been painful to me. I therefore then 
wrote an admonition to you, that ye might correct the evil, 
and that when T should actnally come to you I might have 
joy in you. In this way, though my letter caused some 
sorrow, it was like the process of healing which finally gives 
joy to both patient and physician, and did not subject me 
to a personal intercourse of sorrow. For ye are the only 
sources of my joy when 1 come in person to Corinth, and if 
ye are thrown into permanent sorrow, who will there be to 
give me any satisfaction? See our interpretation further 
defended in Hodge’s Com.]. 


CHAP. II. 1-11. 


— 





you, my children, afford me; and I must be des- 
titute of it entirely, for I cannot expect joy from 
one who has been saddened by me, The singu- 
lar ὁ λυπόυμενος is rendered necessary not only 
by the ric, but by the abstract form in which the 
matter is put. The reference is not to the case 
of the incestuous person (1 Cor. v. 1). ’Eyo is 
contrasted with ὑμᾶς, but it is not otherwise em- 
phatic, and contains no allusion to some other 
persons who might be occasioning them sorrow. 
The ἐκ in ἐξ ἐμοῦ indicates the person who was 
to be the source of sorrow, and the phrase is 
equivalent to uz’ éuov.—I put in writing this 
same thing, efc.—In this verse ἔγραψα refers 
to the first Epistle, and not to the one he was 
writing (comp. vv. 4-9), It stands at the com- 
mencement of the sentence that it might be em- 
phatic, and it is contrasted with ἐλϑών. But is 
τοῦτο αὐτό equivalent to εἰς τοῦτο αὐτό, as in 2 Pet. 
i. 5, and frequently in the classical authors; or 
is it the objective accusative to ἔγραψα! The 
first would be the easier interpretation, but such 
a construction occurs nowhere else in Paul’s 
writings (in ver. 9 it is εἰς τοῦτο). The τοῦτο αὐτο 
refers to that which forms the theme and object 
of this section, μὴ ἐν λύπῃ ἐλϑεῖν (ver. 7), and 
- respecting which he had already written in 1 Cor. 
iv. 21. (OstanDER). The reference to what had 
been said in 1 Cor. iv. 21 does not seem very 
properly indicated, even if we suppose that the 
following censures have reference to the incestu- 
ous person. On the other hand it seems very 
natural for him to make this reference to the 
censures contained in his first Epistle (especially 
those in chap. v.), as matters in which they had 
a painful interest and which might grieve them, 
and to assure them that he now wished to avoid 
a repetition of this unpleasant experience when 
he should be present with them, and that his 
course in that matter had sprung from the con- 
fidence he had in them all. He therefore goes 
on to remind them of the frame of mind in which, 
and the object with which, he had then written 
ver. 4). Meyerthus explains it: ‘This matter 
τὰ well known to you that I need ποὺ particu- 
larize it) I have written and not deferred to speak 
of until I should be present with you, in order 
that I might not,” eéc.—That when I came I 
should not receive (suffer) sorrow from 
those who ought to give me joy.—A@’ dv 
is not exactly as if he had written ἀπό τούτων οἷς 
or ἐφ᾽ οἷς, but—from those who ought to be the 
source of my joy. ’Hdec has reference to the re- 
lation of a spiritual father which he sustained 
toward them.—For I had confidence in 
you all, that my joy was the joy of you 
all.—In most other places πεποιθώς is followed 
by an ἐπέ with a dative, but here, as in Matth. 
xxvii. 43, and 2 Thess. iii. 4, it is followed by an 
ἐπί with an accusative, indicating that the confi- 
dence extended to them and beyond them. The 
Apostle would thus make them see that he had 
written the sharp reproofs contained in his first 
Epistle not from a disposition distrustfully to 
draw back from them, but with an assured con- 
fidence that they were really and in heart so at- 
tached to him that his joy would be the joy of 
them all. He felt assured that they would, after 
his written admonition, arrange every difficulty 
which had troubled him, so that there would be 











81 





no necessity for any oral reproofs which would 
be as painful to him as to them. His love rose 
entirely above those parties which had apparently 
become so prominent in the Church, and especi- 
ally above that portion which had turned away 
from him; and in the spirit ‘‘which believeth all 
things” (1 Cor. xxii. 7), he had fastened upon 
the then latent power of filial affection, which he 
was satisfied would soon be strong enough to 
overcome every hinderance in their hearts (comp. 
Meyer and the admirable remarks of Osiander). 
Hence the phrases ἐπὶ πάντας ὑμᾶς and πάντων 
ὑμῶν [the first expressing his confidence in them, 
and the latter their confidence in him]. In ver. 
4 he mentions first of all the spirit which had 
actuated him when he wrote to then:—For I 
wrote unto you under great tribulation 
and oppression of heart, with many 
tears.—Kapdiac is dependent upon both the pre- 
ceding nouns. Συνοχή is stronger than ϑλῖψις, 
and signifies restriction, oppression, anguish, as 
in Luke xxi. 25; and συνέχομαι in Luke xii. 50. 
The greatness of the inward suffering is made 
still more evident in διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων, from 
which it appears to have broken forth ‘with 
many tears.” NEANDER:—The διά designates the 
accompanying circumstances (comp. Acts xx. 19, 
91). Sranntey:— Ex and δία, ‘‘ out of the heart, 
through tears.” The connection with ver. 3, in- 
dicated by the yap, is explained by Meyer and 
Osiander to be, that the Apostle might present 
the evidence of the confidence he had reposed in 
them: for if, in writing that Epistle, I had not 
had this confidence, the Epistle itself would not 
have been to me the occasion of so much anxiety 
and so many tears. It was precisely because he 
had had this confidence, and yet was under the 
necessity of writing, that the whole thing was so 
exceedingly painful; and yet it would probably 
be simpler to refer the remark primarily to the 
main sentence in ver. 8. His object in writing 
to them was, iva μὴ ἐλϑὼν λύπην ἔχω (σχῶ), etc. 
His great anxiety when he wrote was to be 
spared this affliction when he should visit them. 
Among the things which had influenced him when 
writing thus with so much solicitude, he now 
proceeds more expressly to mention the love 
which had already been hinted at in πεποίϑώς, 
eic.—Not that ye might be made sorrow- 
ful, but that ye might know, etc.—His 
object had then been not to make them sorrow- 
ful, but rather by writing to them to let them see 
how deep was his affection for them. There is 
nothing in this οὐχ iva λυπηϑῆτε inconsistent with 
what is said in chap. vii. 8 ff., for even there the 
λυπεῖν is not presented as the final aim of the 
Apostle, but simply as a means indispensable to 
their recovery.—The love which I have 
more abundantly toward you.—Tyw ἀγά- 
myv is put at the commencement of the clause 
that it may be emphatic. Περισσοτέρως is cer- 
tainly comparative, and yet his love was not com- 
pared with his sorrow, as if in consequence of 
this, or in connection with this, it became pro- 
portionably intense, or with his zeal, as if that 
zeal hecame more glowing as his love was greater ; 
but his love to the Corinthians was compared 
with his love to other churches. It was analo- 
gous to the special love which parents bear to 
those children who are objects of peculiar hope 


82 





and therefore of peculiar care, or who for any 
reason stand in need of special attention. What 
he here says of the spirit which had induced him 
to write to them, does not seem quite applicable 
to our present Epistle, in which great calmness 
and perspicuity are predominant. Some have 
therefore contended that another Epistle must 
have been meant. Riickert, however, supposes 
that ‘the Apostle had deliberately and prudently 
put such restraints upon his spirit at that time 
that his style of writing was no true exhibition 
of his feelings.” We see no necessity for such 
an expedient, which seems so inconsistent with 
the Apostle’s general character, for it is the very 
spirit of holy love to put restraint upon its own 
action that the object of its affection may receive 
no detriment. (Comp. Meyer and Osiander). 
Vers. 5-11. WDigression with respect to the 
incestuous person. The expressions he had used 
respecting the λύπῃ, the λυπεῖν and λυπεῖσϑαι, 
naturally led him to speak of the difficulty which 
had been the occasion of most of his sorrow, and 
of the severe censures he had been obliged to 
inflict, ὁ. e., of the incestuous scandal. Neander, 
on the other hand, asks: ‘*‘ Why was Paul under 
any necessity of vindicating himself for his 
anxiety respecting the incestuous person? The 
matter wears a very different aspect, if we sup- 
pose that in the meantime another case had come 
up, and that some one had made his appearance, 
who insolently defied Paul’s Apostolical author- 
ity, and was likely in this way to produce a di- 
vision in the Church. Every thing may be natu- 
rally explained if we assume that another Epistle 
had been sent by Titus, in which such a state of 
affairs had been the topic of discussion.” Ewald 
eoncludes from vers. 5-11; chap. vii. 2, 12, ; iii. 
1; i. 13, 23, that after a brief and unexpected 
visit of the Apostle at Corinth, some distinguished 
individual had made use of every circumstance 
which could be turned to his disadvantage, and 
that this calumniator had charged him especially 
with duplicity in his public discourses and with 
an attempt to acquire notoriety, power and pe- 
cuniary profit among the people. [Comp. Introd. 
4 0]. The spirit of his address is gentle, in con- 
sistency with all the previous proceedings in the 
case, and the conciliatory strain in which he was 
writing. As a revocation of the extreme penalty 
was not excluded by what he had said in 1 Cor. 
v. 5, 18, provided the offender should be brought 
to repentance, the Apostolical authority would 
not be endangered by his restoration. The fifth 
verse is connected, not with the third (Olshau- 
sen), but with the fourth verse, where he had 
said that it was not his design to grieve them.— 
But if any (among you) have caused 
grief, he hath not grieved me (ver. 5).— 
Not only is the offence not specifically named, but 
the terms used to describe it are of the mildest 
signification, and the εἴ τίς is purposely made inde- 
finite, though without necessarily implying that 
the persons were unknown. ‘There is no contra- 
diction with ver. 4 when he says: he hath not 
caused sorrow in me, for by those words he 
means to say, that it had not been merely a per- 
sonal (ἐμὲ) grief. He wishes it to be regarded as 
a calamity to the whole congregation. (οὐκ-αλλά 
therefore is not equivalent to ob μόνον---ἀλλὰ καί). 
Hence πάντας ὑμᾶς stands in contrast with ἐμέ. 


΄ 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





— 


The idea of λελύπηκεν πάντας ὑμᾶς is softened still 
more by the addition of ἀπὸ μέρους : partially, to 
some extent; an allusion to what he afterwards 
expresses in ver. 6 by ὑπὸ τῶν πλειόνων, viz.: that 
although some of them had taken part in the 
public condemnation of the criminals with too 
little seriousness, they could not, after all, be 
unaffected by its unhappy results. Th» clause: 
that I may not overcharge, has reference only to 
the haying caused grief; and the relative αὐτὸν 
(him) must be understood asits object [7 e., butin 
part (that I may not overcharge him) you 
all].—This is a fine turn, for he thus says: in so 
saying I would impose no intolerable burden upon 
him, as if he were one who had injured you more 
than ἀπὸ μέρονς, in fullmeasure. The word ἐπεβα- 
pei has the sense of: to load, to overburden, as in 
1 Thess. ii. 9; 2 Thess. iii. 8; Bengel: ne addam 
onus gravato; not exactly in the sense of: to say 
too much, or to express himself harshly. Not only 
because it violently separates the words vow all, 
but on account of the tone of irony or even of keen 
reproach implied in it, we regard as altogether 
unsuitable the interpretation which makes the 
Apostle say: but partially, that I may not throw 
the burden on all [. e., may not accuse or grieve 
you]. Finally, the interpretation which makes 
the Apostle say: he hath not grieved me (pro- 
perly speaking, or alone), only in part (for he 
has grieved you also), that I may not lay upon 
you all the burden or reproach, as if you were 
all equally indifferent to the offence; has against 
it the fact that the ἐμέ which is there so emphatic 
has no suitable contrast, and it would have been 
necessary to say: εἰ μὴ ἀπὸ μέρους. This last 
objection would also lie against making the words 
mean: but by way of general participation, wt 
membrum ecclesjzx, etc. Neander completes the ob- 
ject of this final sentence thus: ‘‘that I may not 
make the matter too important.” * In accord- 
ance with the mild expression in ver. 5, the 
Apostle explains his views still further in ver. 
6 regarding the proceedings against the offend- 
ing person.—Sufficient unto such a one 
[one who has such a spirit as this offender now 
shows] is this very punishment which has 
been inflicted by the many (ver. 6),—The ixa- 
νόν stands at the head of the sentence for the sake 
of emphasis, and is designed to say that nothing 


[Τὸ understand the author’s criticisms we need to have 
the several ways in which this passage has been punctuated 
and rendered distinctly before us. All that are important 
may be reduced to three: 1, That of Chrysostom, and advo- 
cated generally, especially by de Wette, Meyer, Osiander, 
Bloomfield, Neander, Alford, Stanley and Hodge, viz.: Ei δά 
τις λελύπ., οὐκ ἐμὲ λελύπ., ἀλλὰ ard μέρους (ἵνα μὴ ἐπιβαρῶ) 
πάντας ὑμᾶς, t. 6., If any have caused grief, he hath 
grieved not me, but more or less (that I be not too heavy on 
him) all of you. Theophylact says: the Apostle skilfully 
brings them allin as partakers οὐ the injury, that he may 
have them partakers in the absolution.” 2. That of Theo- 
doret, the Vulgate, Luther’s translation, and the A. V., and 
advocated by Bengel and Wordsworth, viz.: ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ μέρους, 
(ἵνα μὴ ἐπιβαρῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς), t. e., He hath not grieved me, 
(i, é., not so much me personally), but in part, (7. ¢., only as 
apart of the whole Church, and hence on account of the 
share [ have in your griefs), that I may not lay the load of 
guilt on all of you. 8. That of Mosheim, Olshausen, Billroth 
and Conybeare, viz.: ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ μέρους (iva μὴ ἐπιβαρῶ πάντας) 
υμᾶς, t. 6..ὄ he hath not grieved me, but in part (that I may 
not accuse all) you. Billroth: ‘“* Whether he has caused 
grief to me is not a matter for present consideration; it is 
not I that must suffer for him, but you, at least a part of 
you, for I will not be unjust and charge you all with haying 
been indifferent concerning his offence.” | 


CHAP. II. 1-11. 





farther was needed by way of punishment, It 
is used substantively like ἀρκετόν in Math. vi. 34, 
and means that which is satisfactory. The 
Catholic interpretation makes it refer to the suf- 
ficiently long continuance of the excommunica- 
tion. Boththe context (ver. 5, ἀπὸ μέρους, iva μὴ 
ἐπιβαρῶ and ver. 7 ff.), and the ἱκανόν lead us to 
suppose that unlike the same words in 1 Cor. 
v. 5, τῷ τοιούτῳ 15. designed to intimate that the 
offender had begun to exhibit some signs of peni- 
tence. ᾿Επιτιμία signifies, not threatening, but 
punishment, and in this place at least it implies 
that this consisted in yery decided censures 
(Ecclus. ii. 10, where it means punishment gene- 
rally). Airy has reference to something well 
known to the Corinthians. The πλείονες by whom 


- the punishment had been inflicted could not have 


been the eldership, but the majority of the Church 
at Corinth. Probably the action had been the 
more severe, possibly amounting to a withdrawal 
of fellowship with the offender, in consideration 
of the fact that an antipauline minority refused 
to take part in his punishment. The πλείονων 
shows that the excommunication could not have 
been complete (1 Cor. v. 3 ff.), and so that ἱκανόν 
could not have referred merely to the time in 
which that had continued. But it would be ut- 
terly inconsistent with the honesty of Paul’s 
character to suppose with Riickert and Baur that 
he was here arresting the proceedings, after they 
had been commenced, from mere policy, to ayoid 
a rupture with his opponents; and that he 
was now therefore affecting to be satisfied with 
the measures which the majority had adopted. 
The only motive he had for the milder proceed- 
ing which he now advises, was simply that which 
he himself afterwards avowed, viz., that the 


thorough repentance of the offender had ren- | 


dered seyerer measures unnecessary. It would 
have been altogether unapostolic, not to say un- 
christian, to drive such a one to despair. The 
whole object of discipline—that which had been 
aimed at in the punishment inflicted by the ma- 
jority—had been attained. (comp. on 1 Cor. v. 
and Osiander and Meyer on our passage). As the 
result of these proceedings, on the one hand, the 
large majority had shown their cordial disap- 
proval of the offence, the honor of the Church 
had been vindicated, and their non-participation 
in the sin and so their purity had been made 
evident; and on the other, a penitent spirit had 
been called forth in the bosom of the sinner him- 
self (comp. ver. 7). These things constitute a 
sufficient reason for an entire change of proceed- 
ing, viz., for his forgiveness.—So that on the 
contrary ye ought rather to be kind tohim 
and to comfort him (ver. 7).—The ὥστε here 
implies that what he was about to say, was the 
essential and necessary result of the ἱκανόν, and 
it includes the idea of an obligation on their part. 
Still there is no necessity of supplying a δεῖν, as 
if the Apostle would say: it is sufficient to show 
on the contrary your favor (to him); or: so that 
ye may show, on the contrary, kindness. 
ner’s Gr. N. T., 245, 2d note]. Τοὐναντίον refers 
to ἐπιτεμία, but χαρίσασϑαι does not imply exactly 
to give up or to remit the punishment, for it 
means properly to show fayor or kindness. In 
the present case, however, this must, by its own 
nature, have inyolved a forgiveness of the injury 








[Wi | 


83 





done to the congregation, as the word is often 
used by Paul sometimes with (ἀδικίαν, chap. xii. 
13; παραπτώματα Col. ii. 13), and sometimes 
without (Eph. iv. 82 and Col. iii. 13) the men- 
tion of the object. Παρακαλέσαι denotes here the 
friendly intercourse and consolation which would 
correspond with χαρίσασϑαι. This is still further 
enforced by the Apostle when he points out what 
would be the consequence if this kind treatment 
were neglected: lest, perhaps, such a one 
should be swallowed up with an excess 
of sorrow.—The περισσοτέρα λύπῃ expresses 
the greatly increased- sorrow which would be 
the effect of a continuance or an aggravation of 
the punishment. Of course it is here presumed 
that a high degree of punishment had already 
been inflicted, for otherwise all increase of it 
would not drive the sufferer to despair. It is to 
this, the renunciation of all hope of salvation 
and of all efforts to attain eternal life, and so the 
utter ruin of the man himself, that the swallow- 
ing up has reference, and not directly to his 
apostacy from the faith (being devoured by the 
Prince of this world), nor to death by his own 
hands, and still less to his sickness or death. 
The sorrow is compared to a wild beast (comp. 
1 Pet. v. 8). By the words: such a one, (ὁ 


τοιοῦτος), he designates the man as an object of 


sympathy. As the result of the ixavov—daore 
χαρίσασϑαι ὑμᾶς, and the apprehension he had 
given as a reason for it, the Apostle now urges 


| his exhortation.— Wherefore I exhort you 


to make good [substantiate by action] your 
love toward him (ver. 8).—Kupoiv (as in Gal. 
iii. 15) signifies to establish in a valid manner 
and by a formal decision, so that the man might 
be solemnly restored to the communion of the 
Church. To suppose that the Apostle was here 
merely going through the form of approving of 
a decision which the Church had already made, 
and which would have been valid without his 
authority (Riickert); is not necessarily implied 
in the language, and would imply aworldly poli- 
cy, of which we have no reason to think him ca- 
pable. In ver. 9 he probably meets a possible 
or actual objection against the directions con- 
tained in his former Epistle, for he there informs 
his readers what had been his object in writing 
so severely.—For to this end I also wrote, 
that I might know the proof of you.—He 
means to say that his present request or admo- 
nition (ver. 8) was not only reasonable, but en- 
tirely consistent with what he had before writ- 
ten. In his earlier Epistle his purpose had been 
to ascertain their δοκιμῇ, i. e., whether ye are 
obedient in all things.—It was not, therefore, 
a main point with him in what he then had said, 
to carry his apostolical authority to its utmost 
limits. Or more simply: inasmuch as the pun- 
ishment which the majority had imposed was 
not very severe, I propose that ye should now 
bring your love to bear upon him, for the whole 
object of my former Epistle, which was to find 
out whether you would be true and obedient, has 
been attained by the punishment which the ma- 
jority have inflicted. [In these words it is not 
meant that the direct object of his writing had 
been simply to put the matter to the test whether 
they would obey him, any more than when God 
sends afflictions on men that the entire object is 


84 





to prove them and to know all that is in their 
hearts, but simply that his great and final aim 
was thus virtually accomplished (Billroth)]. 
The καί belongs not to εἰς τοῦτο (as if he had 
written καὶ γάρ) ; its object is not to indicate that 
his aim in his former Epistle was the same with 
that of his present request, but to suggest a con- 
trast between his writing (ἔγραψα), and what he 
had arranged (orally) by deputies. The effect 
of the καὶ is thus to give prominence to ἔγραψα. 
The whole context also shows that ἔγραψα must 
have reference to the former and not to the pre- 
sent Epistle. His object was to say that he was 
anxious to prove whether they would cheerfully 
comply with his directions in all things, the pre- 
sent mild, as well as the former severer require- 
ments. Ei¢ πάντα : in relation to all things, even 
those rigorous measures which might be some- 
what difficult of execution. <Aoxiuw# here as in 
Rom. y. 4, and Phil. ii. 22, means the goodness, 
or approved quality; ὦ. 6. whether they would 
turn out to be upright Christians, his genuine 
children in Christ, and obedient to their father 
in all things (comp. 1 Cor. xi. 2; and Col. iii. 
20). [Trench, Synn., 2d Ser. 3 24, Ellicott on 
Phil. i. 10; ii. 22].—Having made this reference 
to his earlier Epistle, the object of which had 
now been attained in the course of the recent 
disciplinary proceedings, the Apostle proceeds 
(dé of progress) to a further recommendation of 
the course implied in κυρῶσαι ἀγάπην, by assuring 
them that he was willing to be united with them 
in their public act of forgiveness (ver. 10). This 
idea he expresses at first thus briefly— Now to 
whom ye forgive anything, I forgive it 
also.—xayo (se. yapifoua). He afterwards, 
however, strengthens the thought in the causal 
sentence—for if I have forgiven anything, 
whatever I forgave for your sakes I 
forgive it in the presence of Christ, lest, 
etc.—According to the common interpretation, he 
confirms the Κἀγώ ( yapifouar) by saying that what- 
ever he had forgiven, he had forgiven it entirely 
on their account. Κεχάρισμαι is, on any interpre- 
tation, to be supplied in connection with dv ὑμᾶς. 
It is not, however, precisely implied that he was 
induced to do this at their request, for nothing is 
said of their actual intercession. He wishes in 
this way to show them that his love was directed 
to the highest good of the whole congregation. 
For after every thing necessary to maintain holy 
order, and the injured honor of the Church had 
been accomplished, and all necessity for further 
severity had been removed by the cordial repent- 
ance of the offender, his affection for them 
prompted him to heal the breach which had 
troubled them by forgiving the sinner, and to 
recover ® member who had been temporarily 
sundered from them. Thus the confidence of 
the Church would be raised, and their former 
love would be revived ete. By the phrase: If 1 
have forgiven anything: he intimates, that in the 
present instance he leaves it rather doubtful to 
what extent he had received any injury (ver. 5). 
He does not say, ‘if I have anything to forgive,” 
but simply, ‘‘if anything ought to be said in 
general of my having forgiven any one.” There 
was no need of repeating the éy here, for it has 
been already made sufficiently prominent in the 
kal γὰρ ἐγώ. The addition of ἐν προσώπῳ sug- 








VN On 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





gests a still deeper reason why he had delayed 
his journey. He had been induced to do so in the 
presence of Christ; from regard to Him who was 
the Author of all reconciliation to God, to whom 
he owed his own forgiveness as a sinner, and 
who had intrusted to him the duty of preaching 
reconciliation to men (the διακοιῴα δικαιοσύνης opp. 
κατακρίσεως, comp. chap. v. 18 ff. ; iii. 9; Eph. iv. 
32; 1 Tim. i. 15). This is not a solemn affirma- 
tion or oath (for Paul nowhere else swore by 
Christ), but simply a strong assertion of his up- 
rightness. It merely showed how he had either 
had Christ and Christ’s cause before his mind in 
this affair, had acted tanguam inspectore Christo 
or had virtually done all in the name or in the 
commission of Christ; though if this had been 
strictly intended he would probably have used 
the phrase ἐν ὀνόματι. In the Sept. the phrase 


here used is employed as a rendering for 99%, 


Proy. viii. 30. Τῇ we take the words in the sense 
first given, we have conveyed to some extent, the 
idea which Meyer and Riickert find in 6 κεχάρισ- 
μαι. They take the words in a passive sense: 
that which has been forgiven to me (a construction 
analagous to ὃ πεπίστευμαι). We meet with the 
word in this sense in the classical writers, but 
in the New Testament, at least in Paul’s writ- 
ings (Gal. iii. 18) and in the Acts (xxvii. 24) it 
is always used in the active sense. Δί’ ὑμᾶς would 
then signify that the pardon which had been be- 
stowed upon him had been for the advantage of 
the Gentile, and especially the Corinthian Chris- 
tians, inasmuch as his forgiveness had been the 
occasion of bringing them to salvation. In this 
case, when Paul introduced the words ἔν προσώπῳ 
Χριστοῦ, he wished to remind them not only that 
Christ was a witness of his forbearance, but that 
he was himself nothing but a pardoned sinner 
before God. Hi te κεχάρισμαι would then be an 
expression of his humble recollection of the great 
guilt which continually oppressed him and made 
him a perpetual suitor for pardon (Meyer). In 
favor of this general interpretation may be urged 
the καὶ γὰρ ἐγώ, which certainly creates a diffi- 
culty in the way of the ordinary explanation, in- 
asmuch as it seems to lay a special emphasis 
upon the perf: κεχάρισμαι, rather than upon the 
ἐγώ, which otherwise seems so prominent. OQsi- 
ander endeavors to remove this difficulty by 
suggesting that Paul aims to represent his own 
act of forgiveness (ἐγώ) as something quite dis- 
tinct from and independent of that which they 
were to exercise, and that he here passes from 
their forgiveness, as one which was then in pro- 
cess and incomplete, to his own, which was com- 
plete and already certain (ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ). 
But is not this rather a concealment than a re- 
moval of the difficulty? Having previously taken 
it for granted that they were disposed to forgive, 
and having conceded to them the initiative in 
the affair, in the full confidence that they con- 
tinued of the same mind, and in order that their 
act might be complete having given to them his 
own authorization and consent (κάγώ), what call 
was there for the following sentence as a reason 
and confirmation of the same thing (καὶ yap ἐγώ) ὃ 
Then if we take the clause passively, how can 
we explain the doubt implied in εἰ te κεχάρισμαι, 
when everywhere else we find Paul expressing 


: CHAP. II. 1-11. 
ee ee  ε  τπεσππ ττππεπσαπ..  πποπρέ͵  ΞΣ ΘΕΟΣ τυ σϑασυν νον ay 


himself so confidently as to his own forgiveness? 
But if Meyer's interpretation must therefore be re- 
garded as unsatisfactory, we are still less prepared 
to regard Paul as here referring to some oppo- 
nents who had denied his forgiveness through 
Christ. Even if we allow of his explanation of 
δὲ ὑμᾶς, and urge nothing further in opposition 
to ἐν προσώπῳ on the ground that it is a mode 
‘of expression altogether unusual with Paul on 
such a subject (everywhere else the phrase is ἐν 
Χριστῷ, or διὰ χριστοῦ), we must certainly regard 
the way in which Meyer endeavors to connect it 
with ἵνα μὴ πλεονεκτηϑῶμεν (ver.11) as altogether 
too artificial. The idea would then be that it 
had been God’s will that Paul should be par- 
doned in the presence of Christ [—‘‘Godis said to 
forgive for Christ’s sake, and Christ is said to 
forgive, but Christ is never represented as the 
mere witness or spectator of our forgiveness’ — 
Hopvge], simply for the sake of the Corinthians, 
that they might be aroused to resist the wiles of 
Satan, ὦ. ¢., that they might not be tempted to 
act inconsistently with the design of God and of 
Christ by refusing to pardon the offender, and 
so overwhelming him with an excess of sorrow 
(ver.7). The way in which Riickert connects 
this clause (iva μὴ πλεονεκτ.) with the first half of 
ver. 10, 7. 6.) by passing over the whole last part 
of ver. 10, is even yet more violent. Osiander 
has probably hit upon the correct explanation, 
although the train of thought needs to be more 
particularly developed, when a slight modifica- 
tion of his view will become indispensable. The 
Corinthians had no reason to doubt that he 
would unite with them in their act of forgiveness, 
for he had already forgiven the man for their 
sake (the remainder as above).* But that he 
might present in a clearer light the importance 
of their granting, or of the man’s possessing, this 
forgiveness, the Apostle adds (ver. 11), lest Sa- 
tan should get an advantage of us (of you 
and me)—~. 6. lest the great adversary of God’s 
Church should get an advantage at our expense. 
Should any person be driven to despair by ourlong 
continued severity, not only would they them- 
selves be lost to us and be gained by Satan, but 
in the Church itself we should be exposed to in- 
creased bitterness and alienation on the part of 
the members, and many would become estranged 





* (Paul, in this case, assumes that man had been sinned 
against by this offender, andso man might forgive for this 
offence. He denies that he alone would either feel aggrieved 
(ἀπὸ μέρόυς) or grant pardon. He refuses to absolve the 
man until the Church nad acted. He was ready, however, 
to forgive any one (w) or any thiny (6 the better reading), 
when the Church had forgiyen. If they had forgiven (and 
he speaks cf this as if it were past, χαρίζεσθε, open perf.), 
he had done so (and for their sakes), if they had not forgiven, 
he had not (he makes his action hyp thetical on theirs, 
εἴ τι κεχάρισμαι, Hodge), and yet he seems to regard his 
action as equally indispensable to the completeness of theirs. 
If ἐν προςώπῳ χριςτοῦ be translated “in the name,” or “by 
the authority of Christ,” the Apostle acted as Christ’s repre- 
sentative; butif,as is more likely, it means “in Christ’s pres- 
ence, as if Christ were looking on” (Stanley), Paul assumes 
that he was acting for the Church and himself, so far as 
each had been sinned against. From this we get the Apos- 
tle’s true idea of absolution. First, there was repentance 
and Divine forgiveness, then confession in some way so as 
to satisfy the congregation, and finally, the forgiveness 
and formal announcement (absolution) on the part of the 
Church or its representatives. Nothing is said of “ ecclesi- 
astical satisfactions” in the Roman sense. Comp. W. F. 
Besser, Bibelstunden; and F. W. Robertson, Ser. V., 3d series, 
Lect. 37th, 4th series.} 








85 


from an Apostle who seemed inclined to such 
extreme measures. NrANDER:—‘‘If the utmost 
severity should be exercised, it would be used 
for an occasion for all kinds of evil in the con- 
gregation.”—Inasmuch as Paul here speaks 
throughout not of Divine forgiveness, but only 
of his own and the Church’s forgiveness; and in- 
asmuch as neither Paul nor the Church could 
have pardoned an offence like that of incest, 
Neander has here found an argument for his 
opinion that some member of the Church had 
risen up against the Apostle personally (and of 
course against the whole Church). On this in- 
terpretation also the objections which Riickert 
and Baur have derived from vy. 5-10 against the 
character of Paul and against a belief in miracles 
sink into insignificance. The necessity of being 
on their guard against such overreaching arts is 
pointed out in the brief causal or final sentence 
—for we are not ignorant of his devices 
(thoughts, schemes).—The νοήματα of Satan are 
those thoughts or plots which he directs to the 
injury of Christ’s cause, to the recovery of those 
who had been wrested by grace from his grasp 
(1 Peter v. 8), to the creation of dissensions, etc. 
[‘‘ The personality and agency of the adversary 
can hardly be recognized in plainer terms than 
in both these passages.’””—ALrorp. ] 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


It is a mark of admirable wisdom in one who 
exercises authority in the Church to be able to 
distinguish clearly between God’s purposes and 
Satan’s devices, that he may so proceed as to 
promote the one and give no advantage to the 
other. God’s thoughts are thoughts of peace, 
and their aim is to deliver and to cure the souls 
of men. But the means by which he seeks to 
accomplish His benevolent designs seem not un- 
frequently severe, for His medicines are some- 
times very bitter. It is often necessary to be 
harsh, and to decline all ordinary considerations 
of delicacy. And yet the severity should not be 
allowed to exceed the proper limits which love 
prescribes. If the demands of justice are satis- 
fied, if the honor of God and of His Church haye 
been vindicated, if a sense of sin and true re- 
pentance have been awakened, if guilt has been 
openly confessed, and a desire for forgiveness 
and restoration has been decidedly expressed, it 
is time to exercise gentleness and to restore the 
offender, and to open to him a heart of love and 
to extend toward him the hand of support. In 
this way the government and discipline of a con- 
gregation is directed to the same end with 
Christ’s own purposes, and are the means of ful- 
filling His designs. Satan’s arts, on the other 
hand, are all with a view to thwart God’s plans 
of mercy, to unsettle the peace of a Church, to 
destroy faith, hope and love in the hearts of its 
members, to turn away as many as possible from 
the Lord and from His grace, and, in a word, to 
produce general corruption. Every one gives his 
aid to these arts, who for any reason, from de- 
fective zeal, from selfish convenience, the fear of 
men, or party spirit, takes so little notice of sins 
and offences, or resists them with so little ear- 
nestness, that full opportunity is given to the 
diffusion of the corrupting leaven. But quite as 


80 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


——————————— ann a aa LL 


great advantage is given to Satan’s schemes, 
when the proper limit of severity is exceeded, 
when discipline is carried to an extreme, when 
no forgiveness is exereised, and in order to 
maintain apparent firmness and consistency, 
every offence is rigidly dealt with, without re- 
gard to consequences. It is always bad policy 
to allow any occasion for suspecting that we are 
selfishly maintaining our own authority by reck- 
lessly pressing forward to an extreme. By such 
means the hearts of many will be embittered or 
driven to despair, and increased division and ir- 
ritation will be sure to ensue. Satan, too, will 
thus accomplish what he most wishes. That 
which had the semblance of prudence and holy 
earnestness, turns out to be foolishness and a 
severity very unlike that of heaven. The result 
is that God’s plans of mercy are dishonored, and 
the character and influence of those who pursued 
such a mistaken policy is seriously impaired. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Lurnuer, Ver. 7:—It is much harder to com- 
fort a troubled conscience than to raise the dead. 
—While, therefore, ministers ought doubtless to 
reprove and punish with some severity those who 
haye fallen into sin, they ought by all means to 
comfort and restore those whom they discover to 
be penitent and anxious to reform; especially 
when we remember that God spared not His own 
Son, but delivered Him up for us all, and that 
His mercy had been made to exceed all our 
sins, that those who have fallen may not be swal- 
lowed up by too much sorrow. 

Srarke, Ver. 1:—A pastor who has the salva- 
tion of his people supremely at heart will be 
careful to show great indulgence to the weak, to 
avoid every needless occasion for punishment, 
and to do nothing likely to produce ill-will or in- 
jury to any one, without the prospect of a greater 
ultimate benefit. Ecclus. xx. 1; xxii. 6.—Ver. 
8. Atrue minister of Christ rejoices over nothing 
so much as the spiritual prosperity of his peo- 
ple, and nothing will trouble him more than their 
spiritual declension. In like manner, an honest 
and upright hearer may be known, by the joy 
which his minister feels and the praises which 
his minister renders to God, on his account, and 
by the readiness with which he removes by a 
speedy amendment all occasion of disquietude 
which he may have given to the heart of his pas- 
tor (Heb. xiii. 17; Rom. xvi. 19). The real mo- 
tive for carnal zeal in the infliction of punish- 
ment is hatred, and we need not be surprised to 
find those who possess it, restless in disposition 
and followed by continual opposition. True 
spiritual zeal, on the other hand, may be equally 
earnest, but it will be moved and pervaded by 
love, it will be always calm, and it will remain 
loving and beloved unto the end.—Hrpinaer :— 
How much sorrow and how many tears Paul gave 
to the case of one offender! how many hast thou 
bestowed upon the many wandering and lost ones 
of thy flock? The Lord have mercy on the poor 
sheep of such a shepherd !—ver. 7. Unseasonable 
comfort is like a new piece of cloth upon an old 
garment (Matth. ix. 16), but excessive severity 
will probably throw the sinner into despair and 
drive him farther away. Much wisdom is needed 





to apply both law and Gospel in an appropriate 
manner.—God alone can forgive sin (Ps. exxx. 
4); the Church can only point out the conditions 
on which God forgives, administer consolation 
to the penitent, and absolve those who confess 
their faults in the presence of such as have been 
scandalized by their offences.—Ver. 8. Hepin- 
GER:—The penitent should be received to full 
public favor, and never afterward upbraided for 
his offence. Our Lord Himself never broke a 
bruised reed nor quenched the smoking flax 
(Isa. xlii. 3).—Ver. 11. Satan is exceedingly 
crafty, and watches every opportunity to do an 
injury (Eph. vi. 11). We should therefore be 
always forecasting how we may deprive him of 
every such opportunity (Acts xx. 28). 

Bervens. Bisie, Ver. 1:—Our absence on 
certain occasions may be as important as our 
presence on others.—Ver. 4. It ought to touch 
our hearts to be told: I wrote this unto you with 
many tears; and we should instantly inquire: 
Have I really given occasion for this?—We 
should never hesitate to lay hold of and deliver 
those who have fallen into error before it is “too 
late, and yet we must not expect that they will 
readily regard our reproofs as kind and loving 
acts.—Ver. 7. Our love to our neighbor should 
be like our Lord’s, whose long suffering is our 
salvation. He can hold the balance so accurately 
that the sinner is allowed to sink neither into de- 
spair nor into false security.—Ver. 8. How sel- 
dom do we meet with that loving spirit which 
shrinks not from the fallen, but goes to them, 
and seeks to save even the lost. Such a one, 
however, knows how to lay the iron so gently on 
the wound that the patient bears even a deep in- 
cision. 

Rircer, Vers. 1, 2. Suspicion can sometimes 
enter the heart so deeply, that it can give off a 
web of dark thoughts for many years. It is 
better to crush the heads of such serpents as 
soon as possible-—Many are too tenacious of 
their own freedom. They follow simply their 
own convenience and advantage without refer- 
ence to the consciences or the suspicions of 
their brethren; while others freely exercise their 
right of judgment upon everything they see, 
and when they find nothing to censure in the 
outward conduct, they fasten upon some trifling 
thing to be impeached in the inward spirit. 
Thus the hearts of men are thrown continually 
further and further apart, and there can be no 
such thing in life or death as mutual confidence 
or assistance. Those who are grieved for the 
affliction of Joseph (Amos vi. 6), will feel disposed 
to save as much as possible the reputation of ἃ 
servant of Christ whose character is suffering.— 
Nothing can more cheer us under the trials of 
our work, than to find that those afflictions which 
spring from a man’s own or others’ faults, have 
become the seed of a saving repentance.—Vv. 8, 
4. It is never well when those who watch fer 
souls are compelled to labor in the midst of per- 
petual sighs and discouragements. On the other 
hand, when they are cheerful, their joy will be 
the joy of all, and every plant of grace will be 
revived.—In the kingdom of Christ truth should 
never be spoken with a simpering and trifling 
manner, but an imperious and a lordly style of 
address is quite as inappropriate. Those dis 





CHAP. II. 1-11. 





courses, whose object is to reprove others and to 
bring offenders to repentance, should be the off- 
spring of the preacher’s own sorrow, and be 
brought forth with much anguish of soul. He 
must himself know what it is to confess his sins 
before the Lord with many tears.—Love makes 
us zealous, and zeal will admonish and reprove 
our best friends and brethren—Ver. ὃ ff. Pre- 
cious fruit of the righteousness revealed in the 
Gospel! While we justify the condemnation of the 
sin, we sympathize with, and long to save the 
sinner! When the conscience of a child of God 
has been awakened, and his heart has been 
softened by discipline, he should have not only 
a gradual restoration of individual love, but an 
assurance of the common fellowship he once en- 
joyed.—What a difference there is between deal- 
ing with a sin which is concealed, justified or 
praised, and one which is recognized, con- 
fessed, and already put away with godly sorrow. 
—Ver. 11. Satan has always further trials and 
temptations for those who have no meekness or 
tenderness of heart. Ministers must continually 
take precautions against these—Lord, how many 
things are done on our account by our enemies, 
and by Thee as our Advocate, of which we have 
no conception! Thy faithfulness alone can save 
us! 

Hevener, Vers. 1-4:—Painful as it may be, 
we are often bound to grieve others, that we 
may do them good. We must not always be 
giving sweet meats.—The highest enjoyments of 
a minister are those which he feels with refer- 
ence to his people. Between him and them 
there should be the most intimate communion.— 
A faithful pastor should have a very tender 
heart, and he must know what it is to weep in 
solitude over his people. Such tears have their 
source in the spirit of God. None but faithful 
shepherds know what such distress is; for those 
corruptions which allow him no peace, make the 
hireling indifferent and cold.—Ver. 5, Public 
scandals are a disgrace which the whole congre- 
gation should deeply feel. And yet how little of 
this public spirit is there in most of our commu- 
nities.—Ver. 6. There is great power when many 
are united to remove offences. The discipline 
which needs no outward force is the most effec- 
tive.—Ver. 7. The moment we perceive that an 
offender has submitted to his punishment, and 
become penitent, we should change our conduct 
toward him.—The discipline of the Church should 
always be directed to the reformation, and not 
to the mere punishment of the offender. What- 
ever makes him worse, is opposed to its true ob- 
ject.—Ver. 8. The same spirit which once 
caused sorrow, now comforts.—Ver. 9. A genu- 
ine Christian spirit may always be known from 
its readiness to comply with Apostolic direction. 
—Ver. 10. Ministers should never disregard the 
united voice of their people. Its utterances are 
a great consolation when they speak forgiveness 
to those who have fallen.—Ver. 11. It is the 
business of the Wicked One to injure, and, if pos- 
sible, break up the spiritual association of God’s 
people (the Church). He therefore tempts them, 








37 


— 


sometimes, to be slack, but sometimes to be ex< 
cessively severe in discipline, and thus to drive 
souls into despair. Force, intolerance and per- 
secution, have been his favorite arts by which ta 
rend and destroy the Church; and unfortunately 
ecclesiastical history is principally occupied with 
accounts of them.—The Christian should never 
forget that this evil spirit knows of no rest, and 
he should ever be on his guard against Satanic 
wiles. Those who have been enlightened from 
above, are not ignorant of these devices, and 
know well how to thwart such schemes. Only 
those who are short-sighted and simple will look 
upon warnings against them as vain fancies, and 
hence be taken by surprise. 

W. F. Bessur, Ver. 4. A mother’s love will be 
seen in the most delicate attentions to her inva- 
lid child, and no better test of a shepherd’s love 
can be given than when he hastens with especial 
earnestness after the sheep which has gone 
astray.—Ver. 10. The rock on which all true 
comfort is founded, when we are absolved from 
our offences, is the great truth, that whoever the 
public minister may be, the absolution is not 
man’s but God’s. 

[Here is an example of the difficult duty and 
right of blame, or of correcting our fellowmen. 
I. Every one has something of this kind to do. 
A more than common share of it falls upon min- 
isters and those in public stations, but there are 
occasions when every one is called to it. Society 
should not be turned into an arena of distrust, 
where each one is zealously watching over others’ 
conduct, nor yet should it be one of cold indiffe- 
rence towards each others’ sufferings and welfare. 
Where another’s faults are forced upon our at- 
tention, it may be our duty to attempt their correc- 
tion, 1. for the offender’s own sake (vv. 6-8); 2. 
for society’s sake (ver. 4); and 8. even for our 
own sake (ver. 1), since we may be misunder- 
stood if we show no interest in the case. 11. But 
much depends upon the way in which it is per- 
formed; as, 1. by the right person; 2. at the 
right time (Paul declined even to be present at 
one time); 8. by the right means (by a visit or 
by Epistle); 4. in the right spirit (not from love 
of censuring, love of dominion, personal pique or 
jealousy, but from love to the offender and to 
Christ’s cause.—We have here (vy. 6-11): I. 
The Christian idea of punishment; When it 
should be inflicted? 1, when the good of the of- 
fender demands it, for even if he has forfeited 
all rights, he has claims upon our benevolence; 
2, when society is threatened with injury, and 
8, when a righteous indignation at crime calls 
for an expression. When it should be dis- 
pensed with or remitted? When the ends of 
punishment are secured, 1, by the private suf- 
ferings or repentance of the offender, 2, by his 
partial punishment, which corrects the offender 
and vindicates public sentiment. II. The Chris- 
tian idea of absolution: Man’s declaration of 
God’s forgiveness—man speaking in God’s stead ; 
1, its use to save from remorse and despair; 2, 
its representative character (ver. 10), After 
Robertson and Lisco]. 


fey ΠΕ 


88 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


Ee 


-σ---- 





AN ADDITIONAL EXPRESSION 928 HIS FORMER ANXIETY RESPECTING THEM (ver. 
12 f.), BUT OF HIS JOYFUL ELEVATION OF MIND WHEN HE HEARD FROM THEM | 


BY TITUS, ver. 14 ff. 
Cuapter II. 12-17. 


Furthermore when I came to Troas [the Troad] to preach Christ’s gospel’, and a 
door was opened to me of [in] the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit because I found? 
not Titus my brother; but taking my leave of them, I went from them into Macedo- 
nia. Now [But] thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, 
and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. For we are 
unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved and in them that perish: 
To the one we are the savour of* death unto death; and to the other the savour of? 
life unto life. And who 7s sufficient for these things? For we are not as many,‘ 
which corrupt the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, as in the sight of 
God speak we in Christ. - 


12 
19 


14 
15 


16 
17 


[1 Ver. 12.—Instead of eis τὸ εὐαγγέλιον the two kindred codd. F. G. and Damasc. have διὰ τὸ evayy., and the Italic and 
Vulg. verss. and the Lat. fathers have propter evang. Two other affiliated codd. Ὁ. BE. have διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου. Most of 
our Old English verss. have “ for Christ’s gospel’s sake.”’] | , 

2 Ver. 13.—In place of τῷ μὴ εὑρεῖν, Sin. has τοῦ μὴ evp. (though the 3d eor. has τῷ μὴ evp.). It also has Μακαιδονίαν 
(as throughout the New T-stament, except chap. ix. 2, and 1 Thess. iv. 10)]. 
3 Ver. 16.—Sec. omits ἐκ before both θανάτου and ζωῆς. And yet the word has the best authorities [A. B. C. Sin. et 
al.] in its favor, and was probably thrown out on account of its difficult construction. [It does not appear in Ὦ. Εἰ, F. G. 
K. L., and the omission is confirmed by the Vulg., Syr., Goth. and Aeth. verss., and by very many of the ancient interpre- 
ters. All the more recent critics, except Reiche and Wordsworth, insert it.] 

4 Ver. 17.—The reading λοιποί instead of πολλοὶ has the best authorities [A. B. C. K. Sin. et al.] against it. [Πολλοὲ 
was probably thonght too strong an expression. But Didymus of Alex. (A. D. 370) takes much pains to justify the Apos- 
tle in the use of πολλοῖ in this passage. See note on p. 41.] y 

but Lachmann following the best MSS. 


5 Ver. 17.—Rec. has κατενώπιον. and it is strongly sustained by authority; . I 
ives us κατέναντι (without τοῦ). [Alford and Bloomfield think the article was left out to correspond with the previous 


ἐκ θεοῦ, but that the Apostle’s solemn assertion here needsit. 10 is however omitted in A. B. C. Ὁ. Sin. and 12 cursives.] 


EXEGETICAL AND CORITICAT.. 


Vers. 12,18. Zhe Apostle’s anxiety for intelli- 
gence from Corinth—But having come to 
the Troad to preach Christ’s Gospel.— 
The dé implies that the former subject is here 
resumed after the digression. (vv. 5-11). That 
which follows is not to be connected with ver. 
11 (οὐ γὰρ---ἀγνοοῦμεν) so as to make dé equiva- 
lent to ἀλλά, for that would not correspond 
with the tenor,of the discourse. Nor is it to be 
referred back to chap. i. 16, nor to chap. i. 28, 
but to chap. ii. 4. In this latter passage he 
had spoken of the anguish with which he had 
written his first Epistle, and he here says that 
when he was going from Ephesus to Macedonia 
he could not throw off his anxiety for the Corin- 
thians. [He had not intended to make a direct 
journey to Corinth, but to make a missionary 
tour in the interest of Christ’s Gospel (εἰς τὸ evay. 
τ. Χριστοῦ), Tyndale: for Christ’s Gospel’s sake]. 
Though he had doubtless intended to preach the 
Gospel at Troas, he now lost the opportunity on 
account of his solicitude for the Corinthians.— 
[The Troad was the region of the country, of 
which Troas was the principal city.* The arti- 





[* The city was called by its original founder, Antigonia 
Troas, and by Lysimachus, who much improved it, Alexan- 
dria Troas, frequently simply Alexandria. It was on the 
great Roman road, by which it had an extensive trade into 
the interior and the South. Jt was a Roman colony, with 
the jus Italicum, or right of Roman citizenship, and was 
much favored by the Romans. from a conceit that their an- 
costors came from ‘Troy, the site of which was close by. 


cle, which was generally used in the New Testa- 
ment with names of countries (Jelf. ¢ 450 5), 
Stanley thinks may possibly indicate that only 
the country of the Troad was meant here, It can 
hardly be possible that Paul did not visit the city. 
The same expression (εἰς τὴν Τρωάδα) is used in 
Acts xx. 6. Paul had been there once before 
(Acts xvi. 8), and he was there a longer time on 
his return from Greece to Jerusalem (Acts xx. 
6-13), and once after the close of the Apostolic 
history. (2 Tim. iv. 18). It was the usual port 
at which those passing from Greece to Asia 
landed. A church must have been established 
there at least on Paul’s second yisit. [comp. the 
word ἀποταξάμενος with Acts xx. 6 ΓΝ He had 
tarried there with the express design of preach- 
ing the Gospel of salvation. Τοῦ χριστοῦ is the 
genitive of the object: Neanper: ‘the Gospel 
which proceeded from Christ.’ He intends to 
say that with such a design he would have felt 
bound to remain for some time, inasmuch as he 
found there a fair prospect of an unusual success 
in his work.x—And a door was opened to 
me in the Lord.—(comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 9). The 
καί also is equivalent to καίπερ. Ἔν κυρίῳ has 
the same meaning as Χριστῷ, and it is added to 
define more particularly, the sphere or element 
of activity for which an occasion had then been 
presented; the department in which a door had 





Gibbon says that Constantine once thought of making it the 
seat of his empire. Its modern name, Eski Stamboul (Old 
Constantinople), seems to commemorate this thought, Cony- 
beare and Howson’'s Life of St. Paul, Vol. I. p. 279-81, and 
Howson in Smith's Dict.] 


CHAP. II. 12-17. 


89 





been opened for him, and not the Agent by whose 
power the door had been opened.—I had no 
rest in my spirit when I found not Titus 
my brother.—’Eoyyxa is used here, as in chap. 
i. 9, and frequently in an aoristic sense (Meyer: 
as was the frequent practice of the Greek ora- 
tors in order to bring the past before the mind 
with greater vividness). “Aveowc (used also in 
chap. vii. 5; viii. 13) means properly relaxation 
or relief, and it is here contrasted with the in- 
tense strain which had been put upon his feel- 
ings, by his solicitude on their account. He 
could not perform his ordinary duties as in 
other places, until this anxiety should be re- 
moved. The meaning of τῷ πνεύματι in this con- 
nection is: for my mind. (dat. comm.). The ex- 
pression is more suggestive than τῇ ψυχῇ μου 
would have been. (comp. Beck, Seelenl. p, 45). 
The Apostle means to say that it was ‘‘one of 
those violent assaults upon his vital energies 
which come upon us in certain states of the 
mind and body when we have been acted upon 
for a long time by terrors and a want of rest, 
etc.—those powerful agitations which affect the 
very seat of life.” In τῷ py εὑρεῖν κ. τ. A. he 
gives the reason for ovx ἔσχηκα ἄνεσιν. [ Winer, 
Gr. 2 45, 5.] He had expected to meet at Troas, 
or at least in Macedonia, his assistant Titus, to 
let him know what effect his first Epistle had 
produced at Corinth. Not finding Titus, his 
anxiety was so great that he could remain there 
no longer, but he hastened to Macedonia, where we 
know Titus soon met him (chap. vii. 6 ff.)—But 
taking leave of them I went forth into Ma- 
cedonia.— Αποτάσσεσϑαι τινι is an Alexandrian 
form of expression for ἀσπάζεσϑαι, and occurs also 
in Luke ix. 61, and Acts xvii. 18-21. It signi- 
fies to separate one’s self, to take leave of some 
one. [The expression is peculiar, however, since 
it is taken from the effort usually made by those 
taking their departure, to put every thing in 
order, and to give their last directions. (Osian- 
der)]. Avroic has reference to the people, and 
especially to believers in Troas.* 

Vers. 14-17. [‘‘All that follows, until the 
writer returns to his historical statement in 
chap. vii. 5, is on the subject of the Christian or 
rather Apostolical ministry as exemplified in 
Paul’s special relations to the Corinthian 
Church. This apparent digression is really the 
main topic of the Epistle. It was the Apostle’s 
object to set forth and maintain the importance 
of his office and work and his personal claim to 
spiritual authority. This object is kept in view 
throughout, and after the instructions in matters 
of business which follow the recurrence of the 
mention of Titus (chap. vii. 5), it is continuously 


[* Stanley suggests a vivid picture of Paul in this anxious 
state of mind, ‘on the wooded shores of that classic region 
under the heights of Ida.” All associations connected with 
its ancient history had but “slight effect upon the mind of 
the Apostle,” which was either upon the open door to preach 
Christ’s Gospel, or ‘‘ vainly expecting the white sail of the 
ship which was to bring back his friend from Corinth.” If 
the love of Christ had not dispossessed Paul’s heart of every 
other interest, such scenes would have had a peculiar charm 
for him. See also Conyb. and Howson, Intruduction, Vol. I. 
p.16 and p. 362. Such conflicting emotions and changes 
of purpose are not inconsistent with Paul’s being under the 
guidance of the Holy Ghost (Webster and Wilkinson), inas- 
much as that divine agent works out his own guidance of 
wisdom by means of, and in consistency with, the purely 
human feelings of the subject.] 





and openly pursued to the end of the Epistle.” 
Wesster and WiLkinson.].—But thanks be 
unto God, who always causes us to tri- 
umph in Christ.—By a sudden transition the 
Apostle now turns aside to render thanks to God, 
not for the results of his visit at Troas, where he 
could not have remained long enough to accom- 
plish any thing worthy of being thus mentioned; 
but either for the accounts brought from Co- 
rinth by Titus, of which he makes no express 
mention until chap. vii. 6; or foy the blessing 
upon his Apostolic labors during his journey, 
especially in Macedonia (Osiander). The context 
rather favors the first of these, since thanks seem 
quite appropriate after his liberation from the 
distress and uneasiness of which he had given 
such a picture (Meyer). That he makes no direct 
mention of this, and expresses himself only in 
general terms, is accounted for by the fact that 
he was anxious to make no unpleasant impres- 
sion by amore obvious allusion to the state of 
things at Corinth at this point of his discourse. 
The view which seems best to correspond with 
both the context and the form of expression, 
would seem to be, that he had been much de- 
lighted with the good account from Corinth, to 
which he had slightly alluded in ver. 6 (ἐπιτιμία 
ἡ ὑπὸ τῶν πλειόνων), and he now pours forth his 
thanks for the triumph of which he always and 
everywhere was a partaker. The favorable turn 
of affairs at Corinth and the accomplishment of 
his main objects there were of course involved in 
the πάντοτε and the ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ, but they are so 
concealed in the general expression that nothing 
offensive would be noticed in his triumphal ex- . 
ultation. It is questionable whether ϑριαμβείοντι 
is to be taken according to the usage of the word 
in other places (also in Col. ii. 15), in the sense 
of triumphat (de nobis), or according to the ana- 
logy of βασιλεύειν, 1 Sam. vill. 22; μαϑητεύειν, 
Matth. xxviii. 19, and some other words, in the 
transitive sense of triumphare facit. As the result 
of the first method, Meyer presents the idea of 
the passage thus: who never ceases to exhibit us 
(the Apostolic teachers) in all the world as those 
whom He has overcome. God had overcome 
them in their conversion, and He was continually 
triumphing in the results which they as His 
servants were accomplishing in His kingdom, and 
especially in the happy results of his first Epistle 
at Corinth. With Paul, such an idea would natu- 
rally be expressed when he remembered with 
sorrow his earlier persecution of the Church, and 
it would accord with his humble desire to give 
God the honor of all that he had done. Although 
this explanation is rather artificial, it has better 
ground for itself than others, which represent 
this leading about in triumph as fulfilled when 
they journeyed from place to place according to 
the good pleasure and will of God (Wetstein) ; or 
as a triumphal exhibition of them, not as con- 
quered persons, but as servants taking part in 
God’s triumph; or as a Divine triumph over Paul 
by showing the folly of all his cares and anxie- 
ties when all things came to a fortunate result; 
or as a leading him about in triumph in the per- 
secutions he was made to endure. On the whole 
we feel compelled to decide in favor of the tran- 
sitive signification of the word, which makes 
Paul a leader appointed by God to struggle in 


40 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


nn. TT  Ρτττοο, 


the spiritual conflict, and by the success of his 
preaching and the confusion of all his opponents 
making him a uniform conqueror before the 
world. (Comp. Osiander).* ‘Ev τῷ Χριστῷ de- 
fines the sphere in which the victory and the 
triumph takes place. This is Christ, in whose 
service they are employed and whose Gospel 
they preached with such triumphant success. 
What is here intended by ϑριαμβεύειν will be made 
more evident under the figure of the succeeding 
metaphor:—and maketh manifest the sa- 
vour of His knowledge by us in every 
place.—lIn this sentence αὐτοῦ has reference, not 
to God, as has sometimes been concluded on ac- 
count of chap. x. 5, but to Christ on account of 
ἐν τᾷ Χριστῷ and évwdia Χριστοῦ in ver. 15. This 
knowledge of Christ is set forth under the figure 
of an odor which God diffused in every place by 
the ministry of the Apostles. Such a figure well 
illustrates the pungent nature of this knowledge, 
the facility with which it is usually diffused, and 
perhaps also the refreshment it affords. NrAN- 
DER: “ὀσμή signifies any thing which has a pun- 
gent odor, an essence; it may correspond with the 


later Jewish [2 which is just as applicable to a 


refreshing aromatic essence as to a fatal poison.” 
It is hardly probable that the Apostle was led to 
use this figure by the idea of a triumph in which 
the air was filled sometimes with the fragrance of 


{* The word θριαμβεύοντι has been explained in: (1), a 
neuter sense, triumphare de nobis, to triumph over us: (2), 
a transitive sense, triumphare nos, to lead us in triumph; 
(3), a causative sense, triumphantes nos facere, to make ns 
triumph. Ancient Greek usage among the classics is proba- 
bly uniform in fayor of the first, and the only other instance 
in the N. Τὶ where the word is used (Col. ii. 15) looks in the 
same direction. But though it is adopted in the Vulgate, 
and is given as the first definition by several Latin exposi- 
tors, it seems hard to make good sense with such a meaning 
in our passage, where the idea certainly is not that of a sub- 
dued and captive enemy led about in humiliation and finally 
to death. Even with this idea eliminated, and remembering 
that Paul sometimes speaks of himself as a subdued and 
willing captive to Christ, we never find him thus speaking 
of himself with others (plural). His object here seems rather 
to be, to show how he and his companions, and not merely 
Christ, were triumphing. If this makes us inclined to favor 
the second signification, with Calvin (in his comments, not 
in his translation), Bengel, de Wette and Wordsworth, we 
are met by the fact that neither early nor late Greek usage 
is in favor of such a construction. Some Greek fathers, in- 
deed, whose opinions on a question of N. Τὶ language or Ro- 
man usage is entitled to great consideration, give it this 
meaning. Though their definitions favor No. 1, they usu- 
ally interpret it simply of a triumph over afflictions and 
persecutions, and leading the Apostles about the world in a 
triumphant victory over every kind of endurance Thus 
Chrysostom (and after him substantially Theophyl. and 
Occum.): τῷ πᾶσι ποιοῦντι περιφανεῖς, “Who maketh us 
conspicuous to all;” and Theodoret: σοφῶς τὰ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς 
πρυτανεύων, τῆδε κὰκεῖςε περιάγει, δήλους ἡμᾶς ἅπασιν ἀπο- 
φαίνων, " Who manages all our affairs in wisdom, leading us 
about so as to make us manifest to all;’?’ Damase.: ὃ yap 
θρίαμβος, τοῦτό ἐστι, τὸ πᾶσι γενέσθαι περιφανή, “ For evi- 
dently he has triumphed, who has been made illustrious and 
conspicuous to all men.” If, however, we depart from the 
simple No. 1, we must prefer No. 3, which has some ancient 
authority in its favor. Thus Jerome (comm.): Deum per 
Apostolos triumphare in Christo, victores illos facere in fide 
Ohristi; and Ambrose: Triumphare facit nos per Christum, 
vel in nobis ipse triumphat. In Alexandrian usage (Sept. and 
N. T.) neuter verbs often acquired a causative meaning 
pe Winer, Idd. 2 40, n. 2, and many instances in Alford and 

eyer). This gives an idea suitable to the connection. It 
was adopted by Luther, Beza and Grotius, and is defended 
by Osiander, Neander and Hodge. The majority of recent 
commentators (as Meyer, Alford, Conybeare, Ellicott, Stan- 
ley) “+ the first meaning, but it very easily runs into the 
second. 





incense (Meyer, comp. Osiander). Still less did 
he intend to remind us of the custom of anointing 
with oil. Even the idea of the fragrance given 
forth in the sacrifices seems inappropriate, since 
God himself is represented as active in diffusing 
it (φανεροῦντι). ΑΒ an illustration of an internal 
experience the figure of an odor would seem no 
more appropriate than something presented to 
the sight. Τῆς γνώσεως is in apposition with τῆς 
ὀσμῆς. "Ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ corresponds with πάντοτε, 
God is evidently the one who ‘always caused 
him and his fellow-laborers to triumph in Christ, 
and made manifest the savor of his knowledge 
by them in every place,” for Paul represents 
them as the instruments by which God acted 
(δ ἡμῶν), and thé promulgators of this know- 
ledge. He also describes them as acceptable to 
God, and so not to be depreciated, though the 
result of their labors was sometimes the reverse 
of what they aimed at.° This acceptableness in 
God’s sight is expressed in the words—For we 
are unto Goda sweet savour of Christ— 
in which the figure of a sacrifice (Eph. vy. 2; Phil. 
iv. 18; Levit. i. 9-17) probably begins to be dis- 
cernible. Those who possess and diffuse the 
knowledge of Christ are a sweet savor unto God, 
not because they are properly prepared or offered 
to God, but because they are themselves filled by 
Him and made to diffuse the savor of Christ. 
For the sake of emphasis Christ is mentioned 
first, and is represented as the substance of the 
sacrifice, 7. ¢., ἃ service consecrated to God and 
pleasing in His sight. Bence says: ‘‘The savor 
of Christ is made to pervade us as that of aro- 
matics pervade garments.”"—In them that 
are saved and in them that perish, in- 
troduces the sphere in which they were moying 
or the object of their preaching. Thecorrelatives 
of σωζόμενοι and ἀπολλύμενοι (comp. on 1 Cor. 1. 
18) are πιστεύοντες and ἄπιστοι. The whole idea 
became more impressive by this reference to the 
final destiny of each, when the redeemed shall 
be saved and the lost shall be cast away. He 
speaks further of the effect of this ὀσμή upon 
both these classes in ver. 16. He there com- 
mences with those last mentioned.—To the one 
indeed we are an odour arising from 
death and tending to death.—(oi¢ piv—oic¢ 
dé, are equivalent to what was in the later usage 
τοῖς μὲν----τοῖς dé). The point at which the influence 
commences, or the source from which it springs, 
is indicated by éx, and the end toward which it 
tends, or the effect produced by it, is pointed out 
by εἰς. It begins in death and must lead to and 
terminate in death. In like manner the expres- 
sion—to the other we are the odor arising 
from life and tending to life.—In the words 
from death and from life, we have death (θάνατος) 
and life (ζωή) set forth as the principle or power 
in which corruption or salvation has its origin, 
and in the words unto death and unto life (εἰς 
ϑάνατον, εἰς ζωῇν) we have the corresponding re- 
sult which each of these powers produces. But 
neither in ἐκ ϑανάτου nor in ἐκ ζωῆς is it exactly 
intended that Christ is in such a sense the effi- 
cient agent, that in ἐκ ϑανάτου He is the direct 
source of death (Meyer). The idea rather is, 
that those who presented Christ, or made known 
His Gospel to their fellow-men, are to one class 


CHAP. II. 12-17. 





like those who convey an odor which is deadly 
in its origin and deadly in its result. The mean- 
ing is thus the same with that conveyed by the 
words, the savor of death and the savor of life 
(ὀσμῇ ϑανάτου---ζωῆς), in the Rec., where both 
genitives should be taken as genitives of quality. 
This contrast between the fatal and quickening 
effects of preaching has an analogy in the phy- 
sical world. So far as relates to the lost, the 
result is accidental, 7. 6., it is not caused by any- 
thing in the Gospel itself, but must be ascribed 
to the peculiar spirit of those who hear it. [‘* We 
conyey to all the sweet odor of Christ, though all 
who participate in it do not attain salvation. 
Thus the light is noxious to diseased eyes, and 
yet it is not the sun which produces the injury. 
It is said that vultures avoid the fragrance of 
myrrh, and yet the myrrh is no less myrrh for 
being shunned by vultures. Even so the preach- 
ing of salvation tends to save those who believe, 
though it brings perdition to such as believe 
not.”—TueEoporeT]. Where the word is pressed 
upon an unsusceptible and perverse heart, it 
provokes opposition to the truth, just as in other 
cases it brings into activity whatever is suscep- 
tible of Divine life and engenders faith (comp. 
Matth. xxi. 42 ff.; Luke ii. 34; Job ix. 89). The 
same figure has been used by the Rabbins for 
illustrating the different effects of the law. This 
strong contrast between the different effects of 
evangelical preaching suggests to the Apostle’s 
mind the various dispositions of those who pro- 
claim the Gospel. No one can produce such an 
influence upon these two classes of hearers and 
be acceptable to God whatever may be the re- 
sult of his preaching, unless he proclaims the 
Gospel in a right manner and with a right spirit. 
This idea he introduces in a sudden and striking 
manner (xac) by a question—And who is 
sufficient for these things ?—In this sen- 
tence πρὸς ταῦτα is put first because it is em- 
phatic. He meant to say, that among those 
who acted as teachers, all were by no means 
sufficiently qualified for such a part, for he was 
obliged to place himself and his companions, 
who honestly presented God’s truth, in strong 
contrast with the many who presented it in an 
adulterated form. The answer to the Apostle’s 
question is in ver. 17, and is presupposed in the 
yap. Such are not the ones who adulterate God's 
word, but they are myself and those who are 
like me.—For we are not like the many 
who adulterate God's word.—0i πολλοί 
does not mean the majority of all teachers of the 
Gospel, for this would either exhibit the Apos- 
tolic Church in a very unfavorable light, or 
(with Riickert) would make Paul guilty of a 
passionate extravagance. The article is demon- 
strative, and is intended to point to those who 
were well known. Those Judaizing teachers are 
meant who had set themselves up against Paul, 
and whose number must have been considerable 
at Corinth (comp. ch. xi. 18; Phil. iii. 18). With 
respect to the reading λοιποί, comp. Osiander, 
who regards it as more feebly sustained by docu- 
mentary evidence but as easier to explain, inas- 
much as it simply designates a number of per- 
sons to whom the Apostle wished to be considered 
an exception; and he explains οἱ πολλοί by say- 
ing that Paul had set up a very high standard 











41 








for the purity of Christian doctrine.* The par- 
ticipal sentence commencing with καπηλεύοντες 
should be connected, not with οἱ πολλοί, although 
the character of these is indirectly given in it, 
but with ἐσμέν. The word designates the busi- 
ness of a κάπηλος, a huckster or a trader, but 
especially of a wine merchant; and it was used 
with an accusative to signify one who traded by- 
retail or in small articles (more particularly to. 
obtain a living). In accordance with the usual 
habits of such people, the word finally attained 
the meaning of practising usury or bartering- 
with anything (as with σοφίαν, μαϑήματα). It 
therefore signifies here—to deal dishonorably- 
and deceitfully with the word of God, adulterat-- 
ing it by mingling together men’s opinions with 
the Divine word (Curysostom), [probably with 
the additional thought of making a trade of the 
Gospel from mercenary and corrupt motives], as; 
the κάπηλοι were accustomed to mingle water with» 
their wine (com. Isa. i. 22). Itisimplied that the- 
Gospel had been vilified and adulterated by be- 
ing mingled with Judaistic opinions, and that too. 
with the sordid design of obtaining some personal. 
profit, applause or authority (comp. Rom. xvi.. 
17 f.; Phil. iii. 19; Gal. vi. 12 f.; 2 Pet.ii. 1-13). 
[Comp. Adam Clarke and also Bentley andi 
Trench, Synn. 2d ser. pp. 52 ff.]. In contrast with 
such impure motives the Apostle says—but as of: 
(from) sincerity, but as of (from) God we 
speak before God in Christ.—Our disccurse 
is such as might be expected trom men who speak: 
from pure motives and under Divine inspiration, 
i. 6.7. moved by God and inspired by His Spirit 
[Trench, Synn. 2d ser. p. 72 ff.]. ‘Qc is here used. 
as inJno. i. 14, to express conformity. The repe- 
tition of ἀλλ᾽ ὡς forms a powerful climax (comp. 
1 Cor. vi. 11). He rises, from the hearty sin-. 
cerity which is in strong contrast with all cor-- 
rupt and selfish aims, to the Divine Source of 
Christian truth, with which no mingling of sel- 
fish or human elements was conceivable (comp. 
Osiander). The holy awe which those feel who. 
act under the recollection that God judges and 
knows all things; and. under a consciousness of 
the Divine presence, is pointed out in the phrase 
κατέναντι ϑεοῦ. The words ἐν Χριστῷ denote the 
element in.which the discourse of such a one is. 
supposed to move. Comp. ch. xii. 19. NrANDER: 
—‘‘ Probably the Apostle intended also to imply: 
by this phrase that he held himself entirely aloof 
from everything which did not come from Christ.’”’ 





{* Tischendorf quotes here a remarkable passage from 
Didymus Alex. to prove the genuineness of the reading οἱ. 
πολλοὶ, but which is equally striking as a comment: “ Paul; 
calls these deceivers many (πολλοὺς) on account of their- 
abundance. For when instead of naming them he desig-- 
nates them.by this word, he intimates that they were more: 
numerous, as when our Lord uses it instead of τινές: Many, 
(πολλοὶ) shall say unto:mein that day, etc. (Matth. vii. 22), 
But this word informs us that they are not a few, as when 
our Lord says, Many (πολλοὶ) are called, but few (ὀλίγοι) are» 
chosen. It is evident that the word sometimes even signifies: 
all,as when the Apostle says in Rom, v.19: “ The many 
(οἱ πολλοί) were constituted (κατεστάθησαν) sinners,” for it: 
is evident that all men are: under sin in consequence of. 
Adam’s disobedience. Clearly then the word signifies ἃ, 
great number, not only in the passage before us but im 
another, where it is said, “‘ Be not many masters” (James iii. 
1.) Damascene adds in paraphrase: “* We are not like those 
false apostles who claim to be so numerous (τὰ πολλοὶ). 
For then we should have to adulterate the Gospel. like some 
who corrupt or who sell for money the wine they have been 
employed to distribute freely.”—Migne’s Patrol. Grec. T. 
xxxix. p. 1691, and xcv. p. 719.] 


42 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


The word of God, not only in the individual heart 
(Heb. iv. 12, 13), but in the world, exerts a se- 
parating and judicial power. Its influence upon 
different individuals is not unfrequently very 
different—for while it enlightens and warms 
some, gives them a clear, tranquilizing and sanc- 
tifying knowledge of divine things, and raises 
them to a life of true light and love, it blinds 
and hardens others; just as the sun’s light warms, 
makes fruitful, and quickens some things, while it 
blindsand destroys others. This decisive influence 
which must always accompany the full revelation 
of God inChrist, may be preceded by many divine 
announcementsand influences, whether internally 
through the conscience, or externally by means 
of natural objects, or striking providences; but 
among those who enjoy a special revelation, it is 
principally through the presentation of the law 
and promises of God with all those influences of 
the Divine Word and dealings, which are usually 
so administered as to aid and bless, or punish 
and discipline the children of men. It is by 
such means that men become more or less recep- 
tive of God’s word, and it is by the Gospel, by 
the presentation of the highest truths of revela- 
tion, that this susceptibility for good or evil will 
be most rapidly brought to perfection; since 
under its power they will speedily surrender 
themselves to the truth, or they will soon reject 
that truth and reyile the way of salvation. This, 
however, can be the result only when the truth 
is presented properly, and in its purity. 1. It 
must come froma heart thoroughly pervaded by 
Christ himself, honestly directed to the glory of 
God, and regardless of personal and temporal 
advantages. 2. It should hold forth God’s word 
and nothing but God’s word, mingled with no 
human speculations. God will recognize as his 
own, only what flows from a heart which is pure 
and filled with Christ. But this will always and 
everywhere be attended with glorious results. 
Its preachers will soon show that they are the 
organs of a divine power which can penetrate 
through all obstacles, and that their proclama- 
tions of Christ’s truth and their spirit are ac- 
ceptable to God, whether those who hear them 
are saved or lost. But when those who speak are 
mot upright, if they mix up with divine revela- 
tions the doctrines and opinions of men, and if 
they are governed by every kind of selfish and 
inconsistent ends, the proper influence of the 
Word will be hindered and enfeebled; men will 
‘be undecided and half-hearted; there will be no 
evidence that God is at work and of course no 
Divine victories, and old things will not pass 
away; or, things will sink down into a stupid 
and lukewarm state, in which none will be dis- 
turbed in their spiritual slumbers, or learn with 
any distinctness the true state and wants of their 
souls; real peace will be unknown, and no firm 
support will be found for human confidence. In 
such a state, men will make all kinds of efforts 
‘to satisfy themselves with dead works, and will 
fondly seek support in the authority of their fel- 
low men. Nothing could be more opposed than 
such a state of things is, to that manly maturity 
which is to be found in Christ (Eph. iv. 18), and 





ὙΠ 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


a 





that establishment of the heart which true grace 
affords (Heb. xiii. 9); and it will not be difficult 
therefore to distinguish between those who are 
Christ’s true shepherds, and those who are mise- 
rable hirelings. 

[‘‘In this statement of St. Paul, we have an 
inspired declaration of the freedom of the hu- 
man will. As Jerome says (ad Hedib. IV. p. 183): 
‘The name of Christ is ever fragrant; but men 
are left to their own freedom of will.’ So Christ 
himself was set for the fall of some and for the 
rising up of others in Israel. Indeed it is a 
solemn truth that in the Christian scheme nothing 
that God has done, is indifferent. Everything is as 
a two-edged sword. All Christian privileges, and 
all the means of grace are according as they are 
used, either blessings or banes, either physic or 
poison. Comp. August. Serm. 4, and Serm, 273.” 
WoRrDsWoORTH. | 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke:—Ver. 12. None but those who are 
Christ’s, who have been anointed by Him and 
have fellowship with Him, know what it is to 
have doors opened to them in the Lord and by 
the Lord. Ver. 13. When the Church is sutfer- 
ing some great affliction, we should each one in 
our proper place, cheerfully give her our utmost 
aid, that Satan may not overthrow in a few days 
what has been built up with the toil of years. 
Ver. 14. It is the mark of a true minister to 
labor faithfully and with all his might and soul, 
and then ascribe nothing to himself but every- 
thing to God (1 Cor. xv. 10). It is one of the 
mysteries of the cross and of Christ’s kingdom, 
that those who preach the gospel may have never 
so much opposition, and yet may always be sure 
of final triumph.—Vy. 15 and 16: HepincEr: 
We are a sweet savor of Christ, though our 
preaching results only in the perdition of our 
hearers. True, if none are conyerted to Christ, 
they must be perverted to Satan; yet such is the 
natural effect of God’s word; for if the wicked 
are hardened and the blind become yet more 
blind, it is God’s righteous judgment upon their 
own wickedness (Isa. vi. 9 and 10). Spener:— 
When the world is displeased with the word, and 
those who will not become sincere Christians 
become worse, and become more opposed to the 
truth, we may be sure that the word preached is 
genuine, and like that which the Apostles preach- 
ed: for men feel its power, and are obliged to 
receive a fragrance which they abhor. But when 
wicked men like to hear and praise our sermons, 
when everything is dull and no one grows in 
grace under our ministry, it is a sign that what- 
ever savor we have had has lost its power. The 
gospel may not convert all who hear it, but it 
will produce excitement—and wicked men will 
proportionably hate it. Ver. 17. Hepinger:— 
Take care that you do not corrupt God’s word! 
Even those who hear, must attend to this. How 
many thousand streams are daily flowing to re- 
fresh and sustain those who are secure in their 
own vain fancies and in the way of the world. 
Maxims to keep alive the old Adam are in every 
one’s mouth. Alas! that so many must repent 
only when it is too late (1 Pet. iv. 11). Four 
things at least should ever be on the heart of the 


CHAP. II. 12-17. 


43 





true minister: that he speaks, 1, in all purity, 
with respect to his motives, his doctrine and his 
manner; 2, as from God, asif anointed and born 
of God; 8, as in the presence of God, with all 
reverence and zeal, feeling that God is always 
present and is the greatest of all his hearers; 
and 4, as in Christ. 

Bertens. Breuer, Ver. 14:—He must be a 
happy man, with whom everything, even the 
greatest perils, work for him only a perpetual 
triumph. Whenever truth and falsehood are 
most exposed, Christianity has its greatest tri- 
umphs; and this usually takes place when she is 
most severely afflicted. All Christians should dif- 
fuse around them wherever they go the fragrance 
of divine knowledge—and if they are the Lord’s 
anointed, how can they fail to do so?—Vv. ld and 
16. The sweetest words of the Gospel become a 
savor of death unto death to those who resist the 
Holy Ghost. Such will have it so; they lay hold 
on death, and cast eternal life away. If this 
powerful odor of divine knowledge had not been 
diffused around them and arrested general atten- 
tion, they had not had sin; but now they have 
no one but themselves to blame, for they have 
only the due reward of their own doings. Not 
every one who intellectually possesses the truth 
and has the form of knowledge (Rom. ii. 20), is 
prepared to present it profitably to his fellow- 
men; but only he who has himself put on the 
Lord Jesus Christ, is familiar with the mysterious 
cross of self-subjugation, and has obeyed the 
form of doctrine he has received. The spirit of 
God alone can prepare us for doing His work. 
Ver. 17.True repentance, death, and pure truth 
will seem but trifling matters to hypocritical 
teachers; a good conscience, repentance, and a 
knowledge of Jesus Christ may fare as they may, 
if such men can only retain a hold upon the 
world’s favor, and have Christ in peace without 
his cross and with their pleasures. Those who 
handle God’s word should themselves be holy. 

Rizcern:—Vers. 12-]4. Even afflictions are 
sweelened when we are enabled by them to pro- 
mote the cause of Christ and share in his victo- 
ries. When God opens such doors for the preach- 
ing of the Gospel that all its adversaries are 
ashamed, and we present such evidence that we 
have the truth that it sets men free and awakens 
them to activity, reflection and admiration, it 
should be looked upon as a triumph to the cause 
of Christ. Such results commonly take place 
especially inthe place where the word is preached, 
but sometimes the odor of them extends to a dis- 
tance, and induces multitudes to inquire after 
Christ. Vv. 15 and 16.—Our Lord sometimes 
allows his beloved ones to know that he is about 
to use them, more especially as the light of the 








world and the salt of the earth. The Apostle 
therefore could say that the whole work and eall- 
ing of himself and his companions, had an influ- 
ence upon every department of society, and was an 
honor and a pleasure to God himself. But it wag 
according to the way in which men met the pro- 
posals of the Gospel, that it became to them at 
every step an omen of either salvation or perdition. 
Those who heard that the way to glory must be 
through suffering, might assume such an attitude 
toward it that it might seem to them worse than 
death—and hence, they might foolishly remain 
under death. But where the Gospel meets with 
no such opposition it tends only to life. The very 
first inclination toward the truth is produced by 
this savor unto life, and from that moment the 
course is from life to life, and from one degree 
of power to another. 

Heuspner:—VeEnr. 12. The Lord only has the 
key to the heart, and if he does not open it we 
may rattle around it as we please, it will remain 
closed against us.—Ver. 14. The triumphs of 
the Gospel are unlike every other (Ps. lxxxiv. 
7, 8), for in them both victor and vanquished re- 
joice together. When the Apostles preached, the 
whole infected atmosphere of this world was pu- 
rified by a balmy fragrance, and an acceptable 
incense mounted up to heaven. Why is it not 
always so, when the same Gospel is professedly 
preached ?—Ver. 16. How can Christianity be 
a deadly poison? Only by being resisted, until 
the last spark of spiritual life is quenched in 
men’s own wickedness. To refuse all direction 
from the word of the cross, is to harden ourselves 
against everything else. The same odor or medi- 
cine may kill or cure in different cases, and 
Christianity shows its real power when it arouses 
the opposition of wicked men. 

W. F. Bresser:—Vers. 15 and 16. When the 
sweet fragrance of Jesus’ name is shed forth 
upon all men, without respect of persons, and in 
its full power, if any are saved, it is because 
they inhale it by a faith which the fragrance 
itself produces; and if any are still lost, it is 
not merely because they fail of receiving it 
(Acts xiii. 46), but because the fragrance itself 
becomes fatal, and avenges itself upon those who 
despise it. The power of God’s word and the 
accompanying influence of God’s Spirit are de- 
monstrated, when that word leaves no one as it 
found him; but when its despisers become more 
wicked, and the indifferent become furious and 
abusive. God is not responsible for men’s unbe- 
lief, but when they fatally injure themselves and 
sin against the word of life (Prov. viii. 86), we 
may regard it as a retributive judgment upon 
their own malicious and spiteful treatment of his 
mercy. 


44 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





VI. HE MEETS THE CHARGE OF SELF-RECOMMENDATION BY POINTING TO WHAT ΗΕ 
HAD DONE AT CORINTH. THE DIVINE SOURCE OF HIS CONFIDENCE; EXCEL- 
LENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT MINISTRY AND ITS SUPERIORITY TO THAT 


OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
Cuaprer III, 1--11. 


Do we begin again to commend ourselves'? or? need we, as some others [om. others], 
epistles of commendation to you, or [om. éetters of commendation® ] from you? Yeare 
our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: forasmuch as ye are 
manifestly declared to be [being manifested that ye are] the epistle of Christ minis- 
tered by us, written rot with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables 
[or tablets] of stone, but ia fleshy tables of the heart [on hearts which are tablets of 

4,5flesh].4 And {Buat] such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: not that we 
are sufficient [om. of ourselves] to think anything [from, ag’, ourselves]® as of [out 

6 of, εξ] ourselves; but our sufficiency ὦ of God: who also hath made us able 
[sufficient as] ministers of the New Testament [Covenant]; not of the [a] letter, but 

7 of the [a] spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the min- 
istration of death, written and engraven [engraven in letters] in stones was glo- 
rious [in glory ἐν dy], so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold 

the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done 

8 away [is passing away, τὴν χαταργουμένην]; How shall not [rather] the ministration of 
9 the spirit be [om. rather] glorious [in glory]? For if the ministration® of condem- 
nation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed [abound, 

10 περισσεύει] in™ glory. For even that which was [has been] made glorious had [has 
been having, δεδόξασται] no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that ex- 

11 celleth. For if that which was done [passing, τὸ zatapyoupévov] away was glorious, 
much more that which remaineth 7s glorious [abideth is in glory, τὸ μένον ἐν δόξῃ]. 


wre 


Γ᾿ Ver. 1.—Two important MSS. (B. and D.) et al. have συνιστάν which is accepted by Lachman: but συνιστάνειν is 
better anthenticated, and is now almost universally received.] 

2 Vey, 2.—Rec. has εἰ μή according to A. B.et al. and it is preferred by Reiche, Meyer, Osiander, [Bloomfield and 
Wordsworth. Our author is wrong in inferring (ὁ silentio) that the Vat. favors the Rec. Its authority (as revised,) is 
with C. Ὁ. E. F. G. and Sin. e¢ al., the Ital. Syr. Vulg. (aut numquid) and Arab. Verss. Theodt. and the Lat. fathers 
decidedly in favor of ἢ μη, which is adopted by Alford, Stanley and Tischendorf (7th ed.) The interrogative 7 would 
seem to a transcriber more natural after a question and easier of explanation than the conditional εἰ, It is remarkable 
that all our Eng. verss. (Bagster’s Hexapla,) though following the Rec., translate the passage as if the text were ἣ μὴ. 
Wycliffe has: “or whether we need;” Tyndale, Cranmer, Geneva and Amer. Bib. Union, have; “or need we as some,” 
and the Rheims has: “or do we need” εἴς. 

8 Ver. 1.—The second συστατικῶν is probably an explanatory gloss, to which some MSS. [F. and G.] add still further 
ἐπιστολῶν. [Tisch. retains συςτατικῶν, but most critics reject both words.] 

4 Ver. 3.—Kapéiats has strong manuscript authority in its favor, but it was probably a mistake of some transcriber, 
[The MSS. evidence may well be called strong, for A. B. Sin. C. D. E. 6. L. have καρδίαις. Meyer calls it an error of the 
pen, and Bloomfield a critical correction, but Alford thinks the internal as well as the external evidence is too strong in 
its favor to be rejected, as it is the harsher word and the more difficult of construction.]} 

5 Ver 5.—The position of ἀφ΄ ἑαυτῶν after λογίσασθαί τι is sustained by the best authorities. Rec. puts the words 
after ἔσμέν, but B. C. [and Sin.] place them before ἱκανοί. [Tisch. agrees with our author, but he has changed ἑαυτῶν. 
after ws ἐξ into αὐτῶν on the authority of only B. F. G. et. al.] 

[5 Ver. 6.—Rec. has ἀποκτείνει with B. et. al. and Orig. Tisch. and Alford have ἁποκτέννει with F. G. K., and Sin. 
Tackmann from conjecture gives us ἀποκταίνει, and he is followed by Stanley; but A. C. D. E. L. have ἀποκτένει. Meyer, 
Bloomf. and Words. follow the Rec.] 

7 Ver. 7.—Lachm. on the authority of B. Ὁ. (first cor.) F. 6. has γράμματι, but the reading was probably occasioned 
by the sing. γράμμα of ver. 6. [Alford and Stanley adopt it, but Tisch. on the decisive authority of A.C. Ὁ. (2d and 
8d Corr.) KE. K. L. and Sin., with nearly all the Ttal. Vul. Syr. yerss. and Greek and Latin fathers, agrees with the Rec. 
and most continental critics in giving us γράμμασιν. 

3 Ver. 7.—Ev before λίθοις is not genuine; the best authorities are against it. 

9 Ver. 9.—Lachmann on important authorities [A. C. D. (1st Cor.) F. α΄. Sin. with some Greek fathers and verss.] has 
τὴ διακονίᾳ, but this reading was probably an attempt to remove a difficulty, and to explain the text. For a similar reason 
others have ἐν δόξῃ ἔστιν or ἦν instead of δέξα. 

10 Ver. 9.—The best authorities leave ont ἐν before δόξα. It may have been brought from ver. 11. [Tt is not found 
in A. B.C. Sin., (though 8d Cor. inserts it and Ist Cor. has δέξῃ), and it nowhere else follows περισ: and yet Tisch. after 
wavering in his different editions restores it in his 7th, and regards the evidence as decisive in its favor here. Lachmann, 
Alford and Stanley cancelled it as brought from ἐν δόξῃ in ver. 8 and ver. 11.} 

,, it Ver. 10.—Rec. has οὐδὲ δεδόξασταί. The weight of evidence is decidedly in favor of οὐ δεδόξασται; the δὲ in 
φὐδε was probably taken from the first syllable of δεδόξασται. 


CHAP. III. 1-11. 





EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 1-3. What the Apostle had said in vv. 
15-17 was liable to misinterpretation by ill dis- 
posed persons, on the ground that it was a boast- 
ing or a commendation of himself. He guards 
against this by reminding the Corinthians that 
he felt no necessity of recommending himself to 
them or to others, inasmuch as the work which 
Christ had accomplished by him in their city was 
a sufficient recommendation for him in every 
part of the world.—Do we begin to com- 
mend ourselves.—'Apyodueva is capable of an 
invidious meaning, such as might be insinuated 
by an opponent; do we presume ete. (comp. Luke 
111. 8). ἸΤάλεν qualifies the infinitive, and refers to 
something which might be regarded as self-com- 
mendation either in his first Epistle (chaps. ii.—iv. 
vii. 25, 40; ix, 14, 18; xv. 10), or in his earlier 
discourses or letters.—Or need we like some, 
epistles of recommendation to you, or 
from you ?—The verb συνιστάνειν (τινί) signi- 
fies: to bring together, to introduce, to com- 
mend (Rom. xvi. 1, and frequently in our Epis- 
tle). Self-commendation in the sense of praising 
one’s self, is mentioned with disapprobation also 
in chap. x.18. In the following sentence, if we 
accept of εἰ μὴ as the true reading, we must sup- 
pose that a decidedly negative and ironical an- 
swer was presupposed in it, or that the previous 
question goes on the presumption of an absur- 
dity, [Jelf. Gram. 3 860, 5. Obs. Webster Synt. 
and Synn. of N. T., chap. viii. p. 126.] g. d.: 
‘unless it be that we need,” 7% e. only under 
such a presumption could such an idea be enter- 
tained. This reading is not really more difficult 
than the strongly authenticated 7 μῆ, although 
the latter is grammatically incorrect, inasmuch 
as nowhere else in the New Testament does pj 
occur in such a question after ἃ ἢ, which must 
necessarily exclude all which precedes it. It 
makes very prominent the absurdity of the ques- 
tion: or do we not yet need? and it may be 
regarded as combining together the two construc- 
tions ἢ χρήζομεν and μῇ χρήζομεν. [Without the 
ἐὶ μή, the previous question (which we might ex- 
pect the Apostle to repel by a decided οὑδαμῶς), 
remains almost entirely without notice, and a 
new one is started which only inferentially nega- 
tives it. If é μὴ is taken (as all usage requires 
it to be,) in the sense of nisi, (unles=) the interro- 
gative character of the sentence it introduces 
(according to our English version) ceases, and it 
notices the previous question in the only way it 
deserved notice, viz: ironically or even deri- 
sively. The sense wouldbe: ‘I can need no com- 
mendation either from myself, for that would be 
introducing myself, or boasting where I am al- 
ready well known; or from others to you, for 
none know me better than you; or from you to 
others, for your conversion and present state are 
better known as our work than anything you can 
say. Surely then the mere mention of such a 
thing is enough to show its absurdity.”] We 
often read of συστατικαὶ ἐπιστολαί in the church 
after the death of the Apostles. When members 
of the church travelled from place to place they 
were usually recommended from one bishop to 
another, and the letters thus given became a 











means of maintaining fraternal intercourse be- 
tween the bishops and their congregations. [Paul 
himself appears to have recognized the com- 
mencement of sucha custom. In Gal. ii. 12, he 
speaks of some ‘‘who came from James,” as if 
even then some authority was expected from the 
Apostolic College at Jerusalem. Two years be- 
fore, Apollos passing into this very city of Co- 
rinth, did bring ‘‘letters from the brethren” of 
Ephesus (Acts xviii. 27); and as many of the 
Corinthians professed to be followers of Apollos, 
it is no impossible thing that such were here 
aimed at. The 13th canon of the Council of 
Chalcedon (A. Ὁ. 451) ordained that “ clergy- 
men coming to a city where they were unknown, 
should not be allowed to officiate without letters 
commendatory ( Epistole Commendarie,) from 
their own bishop.” Comp. Neanper, Chr. Rel. 
vol. I, pp. 205, 360 ff. In the Clementine Homi- 
lies Peter warns his hearers against ‘‘any apostle, 
prophet, or teacher, who does not first compare 
his preaching with James, and come with wit- 
nesses ;”” where Paul seems especially aimed at, 
and we have perhaps a specimen of what Paul 
was contending against in our epistle.] W. F. 
Besser: ‘‘ Were the Corinthians inclined to reck- 
on their own Apostle among those strangers 
who needed such letters?” ‘the absurdity im- 
plied in the question lay in the supposition that 
the Apostle [éavrodc¢] who was well known not 
only at Corinth but everywhere, should need 
any commendation from others or from him- 
self, as if he were a stranger. By the words 
ὡς τινες he evidently alludes to those antipauline 
teachers, who, as his readers well knew, had 
brought letters of recommendation to Corinth, 
and had taken such letters from Corinth when 
they departed. He thus not only shows that he 
needed no such letters, but he shows this ina way 
which throws confusion upon his opponents, 
while it honors and encourages the Corinthians 
themselves—our Epistle, 7. ¢., the Epistle of 
commendation (gen. possess.; not: which we 
have written, for he speaks not of his own part 
in composing it until ver. 3, but which we have) 
is yourselves.—By placing the predicate first 
he makes it more emphatic and connects it more 
immediately with the preceding verse. The 
close collocation of the emphatic ὑμεῖς with ἡμῶν 
is also very significant. A similar arrangement 
of words may be seen in 1 Cor. ix. 2. The large 
Church which had been founded by him, and 
which had become so rich in spiritual gifts, was 
a glorious work of the Holy Ghost, and so a Di- 
vine Epistle which would commend him to all the 
world without anyletters from men. Besser: ‘it 
was an Epistle of a peculiar kind, for Paul was 
at the same time its writer and its receiver.” 
—This metaphor he carries out in the subsequent 
verses in accordance with the nature of his sub- 
ject, noticing first the complete certainty which 
he and Timothy possessed (this is the reason that 
καρδίαις is in the plural as in chap. iv. 6 and vii. 
3) for the commendation of their work, and 
then the general notoriety of this work in all the 
churches:—written in our hearts.—In these 
words his own feelings are alluded to, inasmuch 
as he speaks of the writing in his own (ἡμῶν) and 
not their (ὑμῶν) hearts (although ὑμῶν may be 
found in some authorities of no great import- 


40 


ance, comp. Meyer).* ‘Paul meant that he 
carried this Epistle, not in his hand to show at any 
time, but continually with him, inasmuch as he 
bore the Church upon his heart.’’ It is not of 
his love that the Apostle is here speaking (as in 
chap. vii. 3, and Phil. i. 7), and it would seem 
altogether inappropriate to make him allude here 
to the official breast-plate of the high priest (Ol- 
shausen). On such an interpretation we could 
trace no connection between it and the following 
sentence, fe which the Epistle is said to be 
known and read, not by God, but by men]. The 
phrase: in our hearts, is equivalent to: in us, 
and the meaning of the whole expression is: So 
inscribed upon us and so carried about with us 
everywhere, that it becomes known to all. This 
idea is yet further defined and explained in the 
words :—known and read by all men :—it is 
a work which will be universally recognized, a 
letter which every one will know to be his, and 
which all will read as his [Grotius: the hand- 
writing is first ‘‘known” and then the Epistle is 
‘‘read”’] (Ewald: read within and without, tho- 
roughly). Events which had taken place in one 
of the principal cities of the world would neces- 
sarily have a world-wide notoriety (comp. Rom. 
i. 8).—In this prominent relation to all the world 
we must not suppose that the Corinthians were 
themselves included, as if the πρὸς ὑμᾶς of ver. 1 
were here again referred to, for as the Epistle 
was made up of the Corinthians, they would not 
be likely to be included also among its readers. 
—Forasmuch as ye are manifested to be 
an Epistle of Christ, ministered by us, 
(ver. 3).—Grammatically the participle: mani- 
fested (φανεροίμενοι), the object of which is to 
give a reason for their being known and read of 
all men, is to be connected with the nominative 
of the previous sentence (ὑμεῖς ἐστέ). χριστοῦ in 
ἐπιστολὴ χριστοῦ is the gen. of the author, and it 
is implied that the Epistle came from Christ, for 
it is of the origin and not of the contents nor of 
the proprietorship of the Epistle, that the Apos- 
tle is speaking. He now speaks of himself in the 
words: ministered by us, as Christ’s instrument in 
the composition of the Epistle; and he no longer 
thinks of it as a letter of commendation, but sim- 
ply as an exhibition of the way in which their 
faith had been drawn forth and their Church 
had been founded. It had been prepared and 


sent by the Apostle and his companions, acting | 


as the ministers and servants of Christ (comp. 1 
Cor. iii. 5 ff.). Λιακονεῖν τι is here used as it is 
in chap. viii. 19. The difference between this 
and any ordinary Epistle was evident from the 
materials with which and on which it was writ- 
ten.—written not with ink, but with the 


Spirit of the living God; not in tablets. 


of stone, but in fleshy tablets of the heart. 
—The Epistle itself, the new spiritual life they 
had experienced, had been produced by the Holy 
Spirit, whose continual agency is here pointed 
out. This agency wrought with great power, so 
ee SES Cenk AS ee NES 

[* Since our author wrote, the Sinaiticus has added its 
authority to that of two cursives of the 12th cent., one copy 
of the Vulgate, the Aeth. of the Rom. Polyglot, and one 
MSS. of the Slavonic, in favor of ὑμῶν. But as the Corin- 
thitns were themselves the Epistle, they could hardly be 


confounded by the Apostle with the material on which it 
was written.] 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


es 


as to renew their hearts, but through the instru- 
mentality of the Apostles and their testimony re- 
specting Christ. It seems inappropriate and al- 
together too dogmatic to find in the ink here 
spoken of the figure of those lifeless and impotent 
means which were sometimes made use of, such 
as the law and those doctrines which have no 
quickening power, or the shadows and ceremo- 
nies of the Jewish ritual. Some representation 
of the Jewish law and the Sinaitic legislation 
must, however, have been floating before the 
Apostle’s mind, when he brought out the addi- 
tional figure of the tablets of stone. This repre- 
sentation is not strictly consistent with the meta- 
phor of an Epistle and of ink, and we can ex- 
plain it only by the recollection that the Apostle 
was contrasting the work of the Spirit under the 
New Testament with the work of the law under 
the Old Testament, 7. e., the effecting of a Divine 
life in the heart by the Spirit of the living God, 
with the outward engraving of the Divine pre- 
cepts upon tables of stone. There may also have 
been in his mind some recollection of such pas- 
sages as Jer. xxxi. 31-33 (comp. Heb. ix. 4). The 
phrase πλάκες καρδίας occurs in the Sept. of Proy. 
vii. 8. Fleshy (capxivac) in contrast with stony 
(λίϑεναι), designates a living susceptibility (comp. 
Ezek. xxxvi. 26). [The ending—uvog refers to 
the substance or material of which a thing is 
made, in distinction from—zcxoc which refers to 
that which belongs to that thing. Cur Lord was 
σαρκινός (fleshy, of human flesh subsisting) but 
not σαρκικός (fleshly, subject to fleshly lusts and 
passions). The word is used only in this place 
according to the Receptus, but it is given for 
σαρκικός by many MSS. in Rom. vii. 14, and 
Heb. vii. 16. Trench, Synn., Series IL, p. 114; 
Webster, Synn., p. 232, and Web. and Wilk. 
Com.]. The word hearts (καρδίας) expresses 
also more definitely the nature of the substance 
made use of. In speaking of their spiritual 
life, he could very significantly say: ye are an 
Fpistle (a writing) inscribed. upon heart-tablets. 
He does not exactly say: your hearts (καρδίας 
ὑμῶν) but generally καρδίας, and he thus describes 
the peculiar nature of the Epistles of Christ, 
i. e., they are Christ dwelling in the heart by 
faith (Eph. iii. 17). 

Vers. 4-6. In vers. 2 f. Paul had expressed 
great confidence with respect to what had been 
accomplished at Corinth through his instrumen- 
tality, and he had claimed it as an evidence of 
his Apostolic power. In what he now says he 
recurs to his assertions there:—Such confi- 
dence, however, we have, through Christ 
towards God.—tThe same word, πεποίϑησις, oc- 
curs in chap. i. 15; viii. 22; x. 2. Τοιαύτη is 
stronger than αὕτη would have been. The refer- 
ence here may be to chap. ii. 17, or ii. 15 ff.; at 
least so far as chap. iii. 1 ff. may be giving the 
reasons for what is there said of the Corinthian 
Church, but not so as. to make chap. iii. 1-3 
either a parenthesis or a digression.—He in- 
tended to say that he owed this strong and joyful 
confidence of which he was speaking (Neander: a 
confidence that we are able to work such results} 
entirely to Christ; for it was Christ whom he 
served and under whose influence-he accomplished 
every thing he did; and it was therefore through 
Christ that he had such confidence in what he 


CHAP. III. 1-11. 





could do.—But he had this confidence, he says, 
towards God (πρὸς τὸν ϑεόν), i. e., not before 
God, as a matter which was right in God’s sight, 
but in the direction of, or in respect to God 
(Rom. iy. 2) the Author of the work and the One 
to whom all the results were due (Osiander, 
Meyer).—Not that we are sufficient of our- 
selves to think any thing of ourselves, as 
if from ourselves (ver. 5). Here οὐχ ὅτι 15 
used as in chap. i. 24. If this sentence had been 
intended to be the object of πεποίϑησιν, or to be 
simply a development of the thought contained 
in πρὸς τὸν ϑεόν, the phrase ought to have been 
ὅτι οὐχ. Even if he gave God the honor of gov- 
erning and guiding all the circumstances and ac- 
complishing all the results of which he had 
spoken, he might still without impropriety have 
referred to his personal qualifications and have 
commended, and had confidence in, what.he had 
done. On the other hand, he is on his guard here 
and he gives to God all the praise’ He more 
particularly defines what this sufficiency orability 
is (ὑκανός oceurs also in chap. ii. 16) by Aoyicac- 
Yai, (Lachmann: λογίζεσϑαι) τι ἀφ᾽. ἑαυτῶν, ete. 
Λογίζεσϑαι signifies to consider, to reflect upon 
[with the notion of a result, to make out by rea- 
soning], and refers here to that which proceeded 
from him and properly belonged to himself as an 
Apostle, in distinction from the results which 
depended upon the Divine blessing (1 Cor. iii. 6). 
It was the discernment of the best means and the 
best manner for the performance of his official 
duties, and a fixed purpose in the accomplish- 
ment of them (Meyer); or more comprehensively, 
the intellectual and moral qualification for his 
duties—the thoughts which were indispensable 
to the proper performance of his Apostolic work 
(Osiander). On no construction can we regard 
him as here ascribing this πεποίϑησίς and his 
ἱκανότης for maintaining it to God, as if his object 
was to say that God was the source of this trust 
and of his confidence in his own qualifications 
[Riickert]. Nor should the assertion be limited 
to his work of instruction, for this is required as 
little by the context as is the doctrine which our 
older dogmatists were accustomed to derive from 
this passage, respecting the inability of the natu- 
ral man generally to think any thing right or 
good.* The ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτῶν which makes their ability 
λογίσασϑαί τι dependent upon themsglves, is more 
clearly defined by ὡς ἐξ ἑαυτῶν, which designates 
the original source or efficient cause; as if our 
sufficiency had its origin in ourselves (Meyer). 
[Hover: ‘There is a difference in the preposi- 
tions: ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτῶν ὡς ἐξ ἑαυτῶν: not from ourselves, 
as if out of ourselves. We should express much 
the same idea by saying, our sufficiency is not in 
or of ourselves” ]. The ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτῶν belongs not 
exclusively to ἱκανοί ἐσμεν, nor to λογίσασϑαίΐ τι, 
but to both of them in conjunction. If we accept 
of the reading ἐξ αὐτων (with Β. Εἰ. G. et. al.), we 
should translate: as those who are sufficient of 
themselves (ὡς ἱκανοὶ ὄντες, etc.). The positive 





[ἢ Though the context does not oblige us to interpret this 
assertion of any thing but Apostolical sufficiency, yet it is 
quite consistent with Paul’s usual freedom, to break from a 
special to a general subject. The language is quite general 
(λογίσασθαι τι), and the word refers to the lowest form of 
human mental activity: it is not merely to judge or deter- 
0} but to think (Hodge: ‘much easier than to will or 

0. 








47 





assertion contrasted with this is:—But our 
sufficiency is of God.—The word sufficiency 
here (ixavéryc) refers to the same object with re- 
spect to which they were sufficient as ἱκανοί does. 
With this sentence must be connected the relative 
sentence—who also hath enabled (ἱκάνωσεν) 
us as ministers of anew covenant (ver. 6). 
—The object of καὶ is not to introduce a new, 
higher, or more general thought in contrast with 
λογίσασϑαΐ τι, for then the expression would have 
been: ὃς καὶ διακόνους---ἶκαν. ἡμᾶς, but to intro- 
duce a sentence to confirm and explain what had 
gone before: ‘‘ who has even (or truly) made us 
sufficient,” ete. [Conybeare: comp. ἱκανός (chap. 
ii. 16) ἱκανοί (111. 15) and ἱκάνωσεν (ver. 6). Ad. 
Clarke: a formal answer to the question: Who 
is sufficient for these things? God (replies the 
Apostle) hath made us sufficient as ministers]. 
Διακόνους (ministers) is a concise expression for 
εἰς TO ἕιναι διακόνους, etc., (to be ministers), or 
εἰς διακονίαν (for the ministry, comp. ἱκανοῦν εἰς 
in Col. i. 12).—The object of the ministry [{. 6.» 
κ. διαθηκης, the new covenant] is put in the geni- 
tive, as in chap. xi. 15; Eph. iii. 7; and Col. i. 
23, and is without the article because it is the 
genit. of quality. [The article is wanting also 
before γράμματος and πνεύματος 7. 6., “ΟΥ̓ a new 
covenant.” It was new because it was altogether 
different from the old covenant which Moses 
founded. The basis of the former covenant was 
the law (νόμος), whereas the later covenant was 
founded wholly on grace and reconciliation in 
Christ; the condition of salvation in the former 
was obedience to the law, whereas in the latter 
it was faith in Christ (Rom. x. ὃ ff.). [Neander: 
Διαϑήκης is not to be explained here according to 
its pure Greek signification (arrangement, will), 


but in accordance with the Heb. ry" which 


denotes a mutual transaction, an agreement 
(covenant) in which God promises something on 
condition that men fulfil what He requires of 
them]. This ministry of a new. covenant is ex- 
plained immediately by an antithetical sentence: 
—not of the letter, but of the Spirit.—As 
this expression is in explanation of and in appo- 
sition with the phrase, a new covenant, it must 
depend not upon διαϑήκης (covenant) but upon 
διακόνους (ministers). Comp. vers. 7 and8. We 
have here the same contrast as in Rom. ii. 29 and 
vii. 6. The ministers of the Old Testament were 
busied principally with a letter, an inflexible, 
lifeless and written law; and they were bound 
to present and to inculcate with much. zeal the 
duties of that covenant; whereas the ministers 
of the New Testament were concerned mainly 
with the Spirit. They had to do generally with 
a Divine power which wrought in the mind, re- 
newed the heart and brought men into fellow- 
ship with God; and their work was to induce as 
many as possible to enter into this covenant and 
participate in its blessings. These two ministries 
gave a peculiar character respectively to the two 
covenants.—In the sentence—for the letter 
killeth, but the Spirit giveth life—we 
have the reason for what had just been said, 
viz: God has made us sufficient for a ministry 
which is not of the letier but of the Spirit, for 
the letter kills, ete. (Flatt: what was written 
killed, but the Spiritual quickens into life). The 


48 


connection must be sought by referring to the 
great aim of the Apostolic work, which was, as 
Paul’s readers well knew, to bring men into a 
holy fellowship by a Divine life (comp. Rom. 1. 
16 f. εἰ. al.). There is no need therefore of sug- 
gesting in addition that the ministry of a new 
covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit, 
must be higher and far preferable, for, etc. The 
reason which the Apostle assigns is not that the 
ministry of a higher economy requires higher 
qualifications; nor. that under this higher 
economy the ministers must have a capacity for 
higher endowments (Osiander), NEANDER: 
«These words have been commonly applied to 
the contrasted literal or spiritual understanding 
of Christian truth. But Paul says nothing here 
directly on this subject. His words strictly re- 
fer merely to the law as a letter which gives 
commands, and the spirit of faith which makes 
alive. But probably this relation of the letter to 
the spirit may be applied to every precept of a 
merely ethical nature, with which Christianity, 
as the religion of the Spirit, is contrasted.” 
Light is thrown upon the whole passage by re- 
collecting that the Apostle had in his eye those 
Judaizing teachers whose motives were derived 
from the law, and who vaunted themselves over 
Paul because he proclaimed nothing but grace. 
Such teachers were in danger of leading souls 
astray by pretending that their influence was 
salutary, while his was dangerous and corrupt- 
ing. In opposition to such he gives the reason 
why God had qualified him and his fellew-labor- 
ers to be ministers of a new covenant which was 
not of the letter but of the Spirit. Exactly the 
opposite of what they pretended was found, in 
fact, to be true. The letter to which they de- 
voted their energies killed, while the Spirit to 
whose service he was addicted made alive. This 
killing refers, not merely to a negative power- 
lessness or inability to awaken that life in the 
soul through which men freely perform works 
pleasing to God; nor merely to the introduction 
of a moral death, 7. ¢., an opposition to the Di- 
vine will, produced by the sense of guilt which 
the commandment excites; nor even to a killing 
in a spiritual sense, because sin is the death of 
the soul; but to the sentence of condemnation 
and the exclusion from all hcpe of life and sal- 
vation which the law pronounces. Such is the 
idea of death (θάνατος) in Rom. vi. 21, 23; vii. 5 
et. al. This death is indeed occasioned by those 
moral influences (Rom. vii. 7 ff.), and is in other 
passages pointed out under the phrases: the 
curse of the law (Gal. iii. 10), and, the law work- 
eth wrath (Rom. iy. 16). This introduces also 
a death of the heart which paralyzes all moral 
power (Bengel, Osiander). The question, how- 
ever, is, whether the Apostle has reference to 
this in our passage. He certainly had no thought 
of bodily (physical) death, as the wages of sin 
(Rom. vy. 12), and produced and demanded by 
the law (1 Cor. xy. 56; Rom. vii. 9), for such a 
death takes place also independently of the law 
(Rom. vy. 13); nor as a penalty of the law, for 
such a killing (ἀποκτέινειν) would not be a proper 
antithesis to the giving of life (ζωοποιεῖν). But 
the giving life or quickening is the effect of the 
eternal life (ζωὴ αἰώνιος) which is quickened in 


the soul (Rom. viii. 2; vi. 10, 11), or of the in- | 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


NN τ!ρΡτ΄ΤΠΤϊὡὯὡτἵἝἕ“τἷ--ὑ--΄----.----- 





troduction of the soul into that fellowship with 
God which is completed in the resurrection.* 
Vers. 7-11. The Apostle now proceeds (dé) 
to show that the ministry of the New Testament 
was far preferable to that of the Old, both inthe 
effects which it produces and in the spirit which 
it reveals. For the sake of comparing them he 
brings them face to face with each other, and 
then from the glory of the Old Testament ser- 
vice which appeared with such splendor in Mo- 
ses’ face, that the children of Israel could not 
look upon him (ver. 7), he draws a conclusion, 
a minori ad majus.—But if the ministration 
of death, engraven.in letters upon stones, 
was in glory (ver. 7).—Instead of the simple 
designation the ministry of the letter, which he 
had used in ver. 6, he now uses the phrase, the 
ministry of death—which works in favor of, or 
as it were, under the direction or authority of, 
death. He thus attributes the consequences of 
the letter directly to the ministry under it, and 
so anticipates the reason for the inferiority which 
is set forth in ver. 9. The definition: engraven 
in letters upon stones, shows that we must not 
here think of the Levitical priestly service 
(Riickert); and the express mention of Moses 
leads us to understand the ministry of Moses 
himself. We are to regard him, not as a mediator 
in contrast with Christ, but as a minister (dzdxovoc) 
representing all teachers under the law in con- 
trast with the Apostles and ministers of the New 
Testament. By a bold turn of expression he 
combines the ministry itself with its object, and 
designates the whole as one which was engraven 
in letters upon stones (the only point on which 
we can here agree with Meyer, who regards the 
Decalogue as Moses’ commission or matricula 
oficii).+ The ministration of Moses and of all 
his successors consisted in the presentation and 
enforcement of the law whose letters had been 
engraven upon stone (tablets). In this way he 
brings out in strong language the stiffness and 
externality of the ancient service. NEANDER: 


Γ The Apostle intends no disparagement of a written law, 
or of the letter of either Testament. God was the author of 
both, and both are pertect for their proper objects. The 
letter of the N. T. was not written when Paul wrote this, 
and the’contrast was therefore more striking. Chrysostom 
(Hom. VI., ver. 5; and VIL., ver. 8) notices that the law it- 
self was spiritual (Rom. vii. 14), but the Apostle here means 
that it does no bestow a spirit, but only letters, whereas the 
Apostles were intrusted with the giving of a spirit. The law 
only punishes the sinner, the Gospel saves him and gives 
him life. Paul does not say that the law itself, but only the 
ministration under it, produces death; it is sin alone which 
produces death, and the law only shows what sin is and then 
punishes it. As instrumentalities of grace, forms and min- 
isters and letters are indispensable. For the historical facta 
and the objects of its faith, Christianity is as dependent upon 
the letter as Judaism. But these and all educational influ- 
ences are as dead and unquickening as syllables engraven 
on stones, without the spirit; and yet the spiritualism 
which would do without them will be as dead and destitute 
of the Spirit as the deadliest letter of Rabbinical Judaism. 
A religion with only a letter is powerless, but without that 
letter it will have no spirit or life. It was the very written 
word which has since been “a stereotyped revelation,” 
which the Apostles made a judge of conscience (Acts xviil. 
11; 1 Pet. iv. 11.}} 

[+ Our Engl. verss. have here“ written and engraven in 
stones,” which is hardly a literal translation even of the 
Rec. (év γράμμασιν ἐντετυπ. λίθοις). A literal rendering woula 
be: “In letters engraven on stones.” But on Lachmann’s 
reading (ἐν γράμματι.) the reference would be to the general 
writing of the whole ministration, whose essential germ 
however, was in the Decalogue. 
imply that there were two tablets used.]} 


The plural λίθοις seems te { 


CHAP. Π|. 1-11. 


49 





“The article before γράμμασιν was designedly 
left out by the Apostle, because he intended to 
imply that a ministration which was conveyed 
only by letters must have been of a very general 
nature.” If ἐν γράμμασιν (or γράμματι) were 
connected directly with τοῦ Yavarov, as Luther 
and some others contend the words should be 
[the ministration of death in letters, or the min- 
istration which produces death by means of 
letters], the article would have been required 
(τοῦ ἐν ypau.). The predicate ἐγενήϑη ἐν δόξῃ, is 
essentially the same as if it had been éyev. ἔνδόξος. 
But we are here evidently directed to the divine 


glory ("})5) within whose radiance the min- 


= 
istration was performed. Of an essential dignity 
or emmence the Apostle was not in general 
speaking, for in the next sentence:—so that 
the children of Israel could not keep 
their eyes fixed on Moses’ face (ver. 7), 
there is no representation of the consequences or 
of the visible tokens of the glory, but of the 
remarkable degree in which this ministration 
participated in the divine radiance. In ver. 8 
also (ἔσται ἐν δόξῃ) it is the heavenly glory which 
is spoken of. [Webster and Wilkinson think that 
the ἐσται refers to the future, not from the time of 
writing merely, but to a future from past time, 
or rather a future of inference, as, if that were 
so, what will this be:] Then, amid the glories of 
the great day of revelation, when the kingdom 
of God shall be perfected, and when all external 
form shall correspond with essential excellence, 
the dignity of the New Testament ministration 
will be especially manifested. The narrative in 
Ex. xxxiy. 29 ff. is rather freely quoted, inasmuch 
as we are there merely informed that when Aaron 
and the children of Israel saw that the skin of 
Moses’ face shone they were afraid to come near 
him. But everything essential to Paul’s, and 
even to Philo’s account, is there. For even the 
ἀτενίσαι, the fixed gaze upon his face, was too 
much for them. The reason for this is further 
given when it is added—for the glory of his 
countenance—but with the important addi- 
tion—which was to be done away.—This 
addition gives us a new point in the comparison, 
and places the inferiority of the legal ministration 
in a strong light (comp. vv. 11, 18). NeanpEr: 
“In this Paul discovers a symbol of the fading 
glory of Judaism.’’ But he has not yet com- 
menced speaking of the discontinuance of the 
ministration and its glory, but only of that fact 
in which he sawa hint of this. He there makes 
use of no purely present participle (Luther: 
that which nevertheless is ceasing), but, in ac- 
cordance with the history, an imperfect participle 
signifying—that which was passing away. The 
Apostle presumes that this radiance was transi- 
tory; and with great justice, since it always 
became visible when Moses came from the Divine 
presence [Estius: passing away when the occa- 
sion was over]. The inference from this is briefly 
and simply expressed in ver. 8—how shall not 
the ministration of the Spirit be yet 
more glorious ?—In τοῦ πνεύματος the Apostle 
resumes the subject of the ministration of the 
Spirit in ver. 6, which had been interrupted 
by the enlargement in ver. 7 with respect 
to the pauers engraved in letters upon stones. 





But the idea is not that the Spirit rests upon 
this ministration (though this is silently pre- 
sumed), but that the ministration was the medium 
through which the Spirit, and the life he bestowed 
were communieated and enjoyed (in opposition 
to τοῦ Yavdrov, comp. chap. vil. 6). [The verbs 
γίνομαι and εἰμί are here brought into striking 
contrast; ἐγενήϑη ἐν δόξῃ -τἔσται ἐν δόξῃ. BuEn- 
GEL: γίνομαι, fio, ef εἰμί sum, are quite different. 
STANLEY: ἐγενήθη, came into existence. Exur- 
corr (on 1 Tim. ii. 14): ‘the construction yiveo- 
vat ἐν occurs occasionally, but not frequently in 
the New Testament, to denote the entrance into, 
and existence in, any given state.” WersBsTER: 
“ἐ ἐξγενήϑη ἐν 06&n==was mae to be in glory for a 
time; ἔσται ἐν dofy=—=shall be in glory perma- 
nently”’ (Synn. sub. γίν.)]. As ἔσται leads the 
mind to the future (comp. ‘‘this hope”’ in ver. 
22), we must not refer the glory (δόξα) to the 
miraculous endowments and works of the Apos- 
tles. Ἔσται, however, need not be regarded as 
the fut. consequentix, or as equivalent to esse in- 
venietur (si rem recte perpenderis), and we are hardly 
safe in understanding it of a progressive de- 
velopment. In the Apostle’s mind the second 
advent of Christ (Parousia) was so constantly 
present, that it would seem to him needless to 
give a more particular explanation of his lan- 
guage. The kind of ministration of the spirit, 
which he had in view, and the argument from 
the less to the greater, which he applies to it, 
will be accounted for or confirmed when he comes 
to explain more particularly the two ministra- 
tions, the first, as a ministration of condemnation, 
and the other as a ministration of righteousness. 
—For if the ministration of condemna- 
tion be glory, much more does the mi- 
nistration of righteousness abound in 
glory (ver. 9).—[If Lachmann’s reading (τῇ δια- 
κονίᾳ) be adopted, the translation would be, ‘if 
to the ministration of condzmnation be glory,’ etc., 
but the sense would not be essentially altered]. 
Here the former corresponds to the killing and 
the death, and the latter to the making alive, of 
vv. 6 and 7. The condemnation refers to the 
curse of the law. The ministration which was 
employed in the enforcement of the letter, 7. e. 
the Old Testament law, was compelled to denounce 
condemnation against transgressors (comp. Deut. 
xxvii. 26), and by its enforcement of a law which 
brought the sinful passions into active opposition 
to its requirements, it brought men under the 
curse. The righteousness, which is here con- 
trasted with the condemnation, is the same as 
the being just (or righteous) before God, and is 
the great object of the proclamation of Divine 
grace under the New Testament ministration. 
Under that ministration, faith is awakened, and 
man’s relations to God are rectified, so that he 
can be justified, and attain everlasting life in the 
Divine kingdom (comp. Rom. i. 17; iii. 22 ff, 30 
et al.). The Apostle, however, partially modifies 
what he had thus said of these two ministrations, 
by withdrawing all reference to time in the use 
of ἐγενήϑη and ἔσται. Instead of ἐν δόξῃ we have 
the nominative δόξα, with ἐστίν understood. The 
meaning is the same, and the expression is more 
forcible than the adjective ἔνδοξος would have 
been (comp. Rom. viii. 10; τὸ πνεῦμα ζωή). On 
the other hand the expressionis strengthened by 








50 





the use of περισσεύει, signifying: overflows or 
abounds in glory.—For even that which 
has been glorious, is not glorious in this 
respect, on account of the glory which 
excels (ver. 10).—Here the previous idea is 
further strengthened by saying that the glory of 
the contrasted ministration was abolished, al- 
though that ministration had previously been 
declared to have been made in glory (γενηθῆναι 
ἐν δόξῃ), or to have been glory (δόξα, vv. 7 and 
9), on account of the superabundant glory of the 
other. The καί (even) indicates a climax and 
qualifies the verb: is not glorious, or has no 
glory (ov δεδόξασται), which expresses a single 
idea (that which is deprived of glory), and goes 
beyond the minus of the comparison. A more 
particular explanation of the idea is given in 
ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει, Which signifies: in this parti- 
cular, 7. e. with respect to the relation which the 
Old Testament ministration bore to that of the 
New Testament.—The phrase, that which has 
been glorious (τὸ δεδοξασμένον), [‘*shows a 
strange use of the perfect (as does δεδόξασται), 
and is taken from Ex. xxxiv. 29, 35 of the Sept.” 
Srantey]. It does not stand here for the whole 
Old Testament economy, but simply the Mosaic 
ministration, or that which was surrounded by, 
or shared in a Divine radiance.—Having said 
that this was not glorious in this respect, the 
Apostle adds the reason for that deprivation, by 
saying that this was on account of the surpassing 
glory. He here refers to what he had said of 
the ministration of righteousness abounding in 
glory (περισσεύει ἐν δόξῃ). Before the superabun- 
dant glory of the ministration of the New Testa- 
ment, the glory of the Old Testament ministra- 
tion entirely disappears as the moon’s splendor 
vanishes in the sun’s radiance. There is, there- 
fore, no necessity of taking the phrase, that 
which has been glorious, in a general and abstract 
sense (Meyer), without an allusion to the Mosaic 
service in the concrete sense, until it comes up 
in the predicate, where ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει has the 
sense of: ‘‘in this respect (7. 6. when we compare 
the glory of the Mosaic ministration with the 
Christian, ver. 9) the glorified becomes unglori- 
fied.” In ver. 11 the expression, the surpassing 
glory (τῆς ὑπερβαλλούσης δόξης) is still further 
justified by the introduction of a new element 
into the comparison, although it had been sym- 
bolically suggested in ver, 7.—For if that 
which is transitory was with (passing 
through) glory, much more that which 
abides is in glory.—This new element is the 
permanent in distinction from the temporary, that 
which is vanishing: ‘‘on account of the super- 
abounding glory.” For each ministration there is 
presupposed an economy or dispensation, one of 
which is passing away, and the other is abiding. 
The Old Testament ministration with the law 
itself, is supposed to pass away with the entrance 
of the New Testament ministration (comp. Rom. 
x. 4). The latter must remain until the second 
coming of our Lord, when it will be eternally 
glorified in His heavenly kingdom. [Neander: 
The Apostle probably had a special design when 
he used the different prepositions διὰ (δόξης) and 
ἐν (δόξῃ). Διὰ designates a point of transition 
and hence implies that the thing spoken of, was 
passing and transitory, while ἐν implies that 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIE CORINTHIANS. 


“rn 


which is permanent.] Διὰ δόξης signifies strictly 
that the glory merely accompanied the object 
[Winer @ 51, i. p. 306. Webster (Synn. p. 166) 
says that it indicates particularly an object ina 
state of transition, while passing through a 
state] whereas ἐν δόξῃ implies that the object 
continued in glory. Sometimes, however, even 
διὰ ig used to designate the fixed condition or 
state of a thing (chap. ii. 4; v. 7), and hence it 
is possible that Paul used both expressions as 
nearly equivalent, for we know that he not un- 
frequently changed his prepositions even when 
he referred to the same relation. In either case 
διὰ seems appropriate to the καταργούμενον, and 
ἐν to the μένον. In the translation, the distine- 
tion can with difficulty be made perceptible 
(comp. Osiander). 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


When nothing but Christ, and Christ in his 
completeness, is preached, and when the preach- 
ers know by experience the reality of what they 
preach, all who have learned the deadly condem- 
nation and inefficiency of the law to save the 
soul will feel the power of truth, will be rescued, 
forgiven and renewed by Divine grace, and will 
become animated by a spiritual life which will 
know no limit but the perfection of God. Such 
results will need no proof that they are from 
God, for all who have eyes to see will not only 
commend the human laborer but give honor to 
the God who bestowed both the success and the 
power to labor. Those legal task-masters who 
exalt themselves so much above the preachers of 
free grace, will never disturb the common se- 
curity nor bring anything to real order; and in 
due time, even in this world, it will not be hard 
to distinguish between the preaching which saves 
and that which destroys the soul. But a day is 
coming when all things shall be made especially . 
manifest, when those who have turned many to 
righteousness shall present before the Lord a 
great company of enlightened, justified and sanc- 
tified ones, who shall shine as the stars foreyer 
and ever; while those who preached nothing 
but the law shall (Dan. xii. 3) be filled with un- 
speakable horror and confusion, as the lamenta- 
ble and fatal consequences of their course shall 
be fully brought, to light. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


SrarKke:—Ver. 1. No one needs a better letter 
of credence than that testimony of men’s own 
consciences and works which are sufficient to 
praise him,—Vv. 2, 3. Every believer is an epis- 
tle in which the Holy Ghost reveals the know- 
ledge of God in Christ; he is an open epistle in 
which all can learn something of what God can 
produce in the heart; and he is an epistle of 
Christ, for the hands and tongues of all true 
teachers are the instruments which the Holy 
Spirit uses to form him into the Divine image. 
If God’s writing is in the heart, the willing heart, 
the faithful obedience and the ready tongue will 
not fail to discourse of God. In such cases there 
will be real life, and not mere letters upon stone. 
Preachers should never doubt, that when they 
perform their parts, the appropriate fruits of 


CHAP. III. 1-11. 


51 





their labor will infallibly follow.—Ver. 5. No 
one can speak of God as he should, until he has 
been taught of God (Jno. vi. 45). Whatever gifts 
we have, and whatever praise we gain, should 
therefore be ascribed entirely to God (James i. 
17). Oh how many make idols of themselves.— 
Ver. 6. LurHer:—The letter is to teach us, that 
while the mere law of God and our own works 
give us knowledge, they cannot show us that God 
can be gracious; but it shows us that everything 
we are and dois condemned and worthy of death, 
since without Divine grace we can do nothing. 
The Spirit, on the other hand, is to teach us that 
grace without, law or personal righteousness 
gives us knowledge, but in such a way as to give 
us life and salvation. Hrprincer:—The Gospel 
is accompanied by a penetrating life, which en- 
lightens and gladdens those who are awakened 
and condemned to death; it is therefore from 
the Spirit and is the source of spirit and life. 
Every word of God, as it comes from the Divine 
heart and hand, has some special design and a 
power of its own. In some cases it is to com- 
mand and in others to produce obedience; in 
some it is to threaten and in others it is to com- 
fort; in some it is to chastise and wound, and in 
others it is to heal and revive. To every work 
which His wisdom has ordained He has also 
adjusted just that measure of power which is 
precisely adapted to the end he has in view. 
The word which created the world is not the 
word which creates a new heart. For this is 
needed a word of far greater power (Eph. i. 19). 
—Ver. 7. Hepinger:—The law also has power 
andlight It has a terrible thunderbolt for those 
who have awakened consciences, and where 
Christ does not comfort them and anoint them 
with His Spirit, they are struck down to the 
mouth of hell. Those who would partake of the 
Divine nature must mount up in spirit often to 
God, become familiar with Divine things, con- 
verse much with God in prayer, and listen in 
their most secret souls to God’s voice in His 
word, and it will not be long before their souls 
will be full of Divine light.—Ver. 8. The Gospel 
is indeed a quickening and a saving power, by 
means of which Christ is glorified, and rises like 
a clear morning star (2 Pet. i. 19) to shed upon 
His people’s hearts the full beams of His eternal 
glory (Rev. xxi. 23 ff.).—Ver. 9. Hepincer:— 
When the word of the kingdom casts its clear 
light upon thee, look steadily upon it. Many 
love darkness and shun the light (Jno. iii. 19). 
Walk in the light lest darkness come upon thee 
(Jno. xii. 835).—Ver. 10. The Gospelis the source 
of an indescribable glory when it is truly applied 
to the hearts of God's people, for the glory of the 
Lord is even now shed forth upon them; but 
when Jesus, who is their life, shall be fully re- 
vealed, their glory will be complete (Col. iii. 4). 
—Ver. 11. The spirit of life is better than death, 
righteousness than condemnation, and that which 
is permanent than that which vanishes away; 
how much better then is the ministration of the 
New Covenant than that of the letter? 

BeRLens. Bisie, Ver. 2:—Real candor and 
frankness of manner can spring only from a con- 
sciousness of innocence. A preacher’s success 
must be estimated not from the multitudes who 
attend upon his ministry, but from the sound 








conversions which take place under it. Many 
may, and certainly will condemn him; but this 
is no evidence that he is wrong. Let us only be 
concerned that we are begotten by the Word of 
truth to the glory of God, and that men may say 
of us: The Lord hath created and formed them 
for himself.—Ver. 3. The minister who fails to 
point men from himself to Christ, is trying to 
make himself a pope. We should never stop at 
what is external, but press forward to the in- 
ward spirit of everything. Let men see that 
those hearts of ours which were once of stone, 
are now fleshly tablets, and that this is the Lord’s 
work. The heart which takes no impression 
from the Gospel, has no part in the New Cove- 
nant.—Ver. 4. True confidence in God, is not of 
ourselves, but comes through Christ.—Ver. 5. 
The spiritual man finds that a union with Christ 
gives him an invincible power, in proportion as he 
sees that he is not sufficient of himself to do 
anything, as of himself, 7. e., to know and over- 
come the subtle assaults of spiritual pride and 
self-will. Few persons possess this power, be- 
cause they never thoroughly know themselves, or 
understand how utterly insufficient they are even 
to think anything which will convince them of 
God’s grace and truth. This is wholly a spiritual 
and divine work, and can be accomplished only 
by divine instruments. When this fact is fully 
recognized, we can no longer endure in ourselves 
those contrivances and counterfeits which the 
ingenuity of man has devised; for every degree 
of credit we take to ourselves, only hinders the 
growth of grace in our hearts. Whatever bene- 
fits the renewed man attains, is in consequence 
of his new creation, and never will he hesitate 
to cast the crown at the feet of God and of the 
Lamb. And yet this subjugation of the vile spirit 
of self-love, self-sufficiency, self-flattery, etc., re- 
quires the severest struggle to which our natures 
are ever called. If Christians in general need 
to be divested of all confidence in themselves, 
surely those who lead them should seek to be 
especially free from it.—Ver. 6. The letter which 
supplies nothing but intellectual knowledge, can 
impart no life—but inasmuch as it reveals only 
condemnation and death, it must actually kill the 
soul. The law can never be anything but a dead 
work to those who regard it in a Pharisaic spirit, 
and set it in opposition to the Gospel. Hence 
the great object of the Gospel (and the law itself, 
when properly used, shuts us up to the same result 
Gal. iii. 24), is to reveal to men a Redeemer, in 
whom they may find life. The spirit of the Gos- 
pel of grace, of faith and of the Lord, gives us 
life, opens to us a way of righteousness and re- 
conciliation in Christ, and makes us able to 
receive and use the benefits of Christ’s kingdom. 
This living voice of the Lord stirs the sinner’s 
heart, so that he must hear and obey. Those 
who have been slain by the law, will penitently 
recognize Christ, and the Holy Spirit will glorify 
the Father and the Son in their hearts, and make 
intercession there with groanings which cannot 
be uttered. The law alone produced disobe- 
dience, opposition, and consequently wrath; but 
the Spirit works nothing but a cheerful obe- 
dience, life and love, blessings and blessedness. 
The more Christ requires of us, the more he 
does for us. Under his influence we become con« 


52 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


RS Ga πσπασαε συνε σι πατπππε πππαεπσυτιι πτ-.. ὦ τ τττὸῸὃῸὃΘὃὀληππζὴὴ 


scious of new movements and new motives; our 
whole nature is renewed, and we take delight in 
those divine, pure and innocent enjoyments, 
which we never had, and could not have before. 
Then we shall gradually attain an incomparable 
treasure of divine life in a refined and good 
heart, from which we can derive light and power, 
victory over all sin, motives to diligence in every 
duty, and comfort and strength for every extrem- 
ity. Ina word, we have the whole power of the 
Holy Ghost, to make us partakers of the divine 
nature (2 Pet, i. 8 and 4).—Ver. 7. Not unfre- 
quently, rather than stand on the ground of the 
Gospel, men prefer going out of their way to 
Moses—the glory of whose face at a distance 
attracts them; but they soon find that that glory 
is too strong for them, and shows those who love 
darkness rather than light, as in a glass, how 
great is their corruption. Thus God sometimes 
finds a way to accomplish his own work. The 
old dispensation of the letter must always be 
forzaken, that we may attain a true evangelical 
state in the new dispensation of the Spirit. This 
requires an honest recognition and confession of 
the truth, and a sincere repentance.—Ver. 8. 
Such is the glory of the spiritual word, that 
even the angels love to study it. Where once it 
enters the heart, itremains forever. The glory 
of the Lord so brightly illuminates it, that every- 
thing which speaks and acts without the Spirit 
will seem like utter darkness. Under such a dis- 
pensation everything begun or promised before, 
comes to its fulfilment; there is no abolition of 
the law and its various ordinances, but only an 
exaltation of them all into something spiritual 
and everlasting. And yet it often costs us much 
before our consciences apprehend the true dis- 
tinction between the law and the Gospel, and the 
main power of the new covenant in the heart 
depends upon the clearness with which the pro- 
mises are understood.—Ver. 9. So sublime and 
excellent is the glory of Christ in the new cove- 
nant, that no sooner does any man apprehtnd it, 
than he will feel humbled in utter amazement, as 
he beholds the majesty, the holiness, the wisdom, 
and the goodness of God; and thus God receives 
back from restored and redeemed man the honor 
of which sin robbed Him.—Ver. 10. From the 
nature and origin of the Mosaic law, it would 
not be hard to infer that it would necessarily 
come toanend. Equally evident is it, that the 
Gospel contains what must endure forever; and 
all the assaults of its enemieshaveonly served to 
evince its perpetuity. It is therefore called an 
everlasting Gospel, and the redemption it pro- 
claims is an eternal redemption. As what is 
good may not be permanent, we should not be 
satisfied until we have found what can never be 
moved. As everything else is passing away, 
the soul can never find complete rest until it re- 
ceives that word which lives and abides forever. 

Riecer, Vers. 1 and 2:—Gladly would we so 
speak and act that no one should take offence, 
but no one can always be so circumspect as to 
be beyond suspicion. It is well, therefore, 
sometimes to meet those misunderstandings 
which we know have arisen respecting us. ‘‘The 
first in his cause is righteous, but his neighbor 
cometh and searcheth him” (Proy. xviii. 17).— 
Ver. 8. What God has joined together, should 








never be put asunder. Among these are: preach- 
ing and the word of Christ; the Spirit which 
glorified that word, and the ministry through 
which that Spirit is shed forth. Stone tablets 
are comparatively easy to be written upon, for 
only the surface needs to be changed. But only 
the finger of God can write His low upon the 
heart, since the soul itself must be softened and 
subdued, not only at first, but continually. We 
need not therefore be surprised that the dispen- 
sation under which God has promised to do this 
is the highest, and that every thing which pre- 
ceded it was only preparatory for it (Jer. xxxi. 
88; Ezek. xxxvi. 25-27).—Vers 4and 5. When 
a man really holds communion with God, he will 
be so emptied of all confidence in himself and so 
united to the source of all light and power, that 
eyen when he is triumphing ina Divine suffi- 
ciency, no words can express his consciousness 
of utter insufficiency in himself.—Ver. 6. Even 
in connection with the law and other clearer 
declarations of God’s will and of His claims, 
many promises of the Spirit were given through 
the prophets, so that the New Covenant was al- 
ready partially developed in the Old. All who 
made a conscientious use of the letter of the Old - 
Covenant found in it abundant directions to the 
Spirit, and through the Spirit breathed forth 
many sighs for the New Covenant. And yet the 
Spirit was not in it, for before our Lord’s return 
to the Father that Spirit was not fully given, and 
the ministration of the Old Covenant was neces- 
sarily a ministration of the letter. Such a fact, 
however, is no reason for despising that dis- 
pensation, but rather a ground for praising that 
grace which reaches its perfection by successive 
periods of progress.—To slay the sinner who is 
living without the law in a worldly course of 
life, is really to prepare him for life and health. 
Unless the process stops there, he will be brought 
to a state in which he is willing to renounce the 
law and his own righteousness, and he will seek 
for that Gospel through which the Spirit is im- 
parted.—Vers. 7 and 8. The more any institution 
or worship gives evidence that it came from God 
and leads to God, and the more the Lord uses it 
to reveal and communicate Himself to men, the 
more it can be called glorious. Hence that min- 
istry which was set up at Pentecost, proclaiming 
peace through the blood of the cross, and impart- 
ing the Spirit, which is the only source of spi- 
ritual freedom and power, is possessed of 8 
transcendant glory; for it has most plainly 
evinced its Divine origin, and its power to con- 
trol the heart and bring the soul to God.—Ver. 9. 
It was a terrible thing to preach nothing but 
condemnation; and yet under the law such 
preaching was glorious. May we learn to make 
a right use of the law; not to show us the way of 
salvation, but to drive us through the door of 
mercy which the Gospel opens for us to the 
righteousness in which there can be no con- 
demnation, but peace with God, the law estab- 
lished, and the Spirit of life dwelling continually 
in the heart!—Vers. 10 and 11. The law was 


originally designed to be only a provisional dis- 


pensation to prepare a way for the Gospel. Its 
fragmentary revelations of truth must unques- 
tionably find their completion and their termina- 
tion in the Gospel; and yet the law itself cay 


νεν:. 


CHAP. III. 1-11. 





never lose its place in every subsequent dispen- 
sation, and it will find its absolute perfection 
when God shall reveal Himself to His creatures 
without a veil. 

Hevusner, Vers. 1 and 3:—However disagree- 
able it may be to a Christian to commend him- 
self, if his personal interests are connected with 
God’s cause, he may without vanity vindicate his 
character before his fellow-men. When his me- 
rits are manifest, he may dispense with letters 
of commendation, and certainly he will never 
truckle or beg for them by low arts. To be really 
useful, especially in the work of saving souls, 
will be our best commendation and will generally 
be the best known; for what work can be more 
honorable than that of transforming and impress- 
ing a new character upon the very spirit of a fel- 
low-man?—Ver. 4. God will be the friend of all 
who are endeavoring to honor Christ. All such 
therefore have the best of reasons for confidence 
in God.—Ver. 5. Our sufficiency for every spiri- 
tual act is from God; for when He withdraws 
His Spirit from our hearts, they are lifeless, bar- 
and incapable of any good thought.—Ver. 6. 

ven among Christians (papists, coldly ortho- 
dox), the letter is served with slavish fear, where 
God’s will is known only from the written word 
without the Spirit’s testimony. In such cases 
nothing but precepts and threatenings are dis- 
pensed, and the written word is believed and 
obeyed from a regard only to authority and from 
terror without inward conviction and persuasion. 
In contrast with this stands the ministration of 
the Spirit; under which the will of God and His 
grace is cordially accepted; an inward witness 
accompanies the word, and under the leadings of 
the Divine Spirit, faith and obedience are de- 
lightful, sincere and earnest.—Ver. 7. That which 
is external and legal has frequently more influ- 
ence upon rudé dispositions than that which has 
more intrinsic grandeur.—Vers. 8 and 9. A judi- 
cial and admonitory severity has a dignity which 
is by no means to be despised, but unspeakably 
greater is that of a love which has compassion 
on the miserable and seeks to save them and give 
them spiritual life. No honor, therefore, is like 
that of the minister of the Gospel, under whose 
labors God’s Spirit is communicated, and righte- 
ousness, pardon and grace are afforded to all 
men. Contrast between Deut. xxvii. 15 ff; 
xxviii. 15 ff.; and Matth. vy. 3 ff. (Cursed, etc. 
Blessed, ete.).—Ver. 11. If, then, God’s glory is 
reflected from all who proclaim His love, how 
glorious must be that ministration which pro- 
claims nothing but love. 

W. F. Besser, Ver. 3 :—As the savor of Christ 
diffuses Christ Himself, so a congregation of real 
Christians are an Epistle in which Christ is 
Himself inscribed and communicated to men. 
The letters which He writes are deeds and men 
(Ps. xlv. 1, «‘My tongue is the pen of a ready 
writer”). — Ver. 6. The whole ministration 
(διακονία) to which the public servants of the 
Church are regularly called, is simply for the 
purpose of presenting and applying the New 
Covenant or the treasures of grace which are 


, 





53 








promised through Jesus Christ to men.—Our suffi- 
ciency is not conferred by the office, but must be 
brought to the office itself. Those whom God 
calls to it are able to teach others, or are endowed 
with a sufficiency when they are called (2 Tim. 
ii, 2).—The letter kills, and even ought to kill, 
that the Spirit may quicken those who are dead. 
—Ver. 9. The glory of the ministry of the letter 
was terrible, because every letter of the law was 
emblazoned with tokens of Divine wrath (Rom. 
iv. 15). As the executioner of God’s curse 
against transgressors (Gal. iii. 10), it can pro- 
claim nothing but condemnation. But now, 
when grace abounds and is much stronger than 
wrath, the ministration of the Spirit is propor- 
tionably more glorious; for now even righteous- 
ness proclaims that God must absolve the guilty 
when they are reconciled to God through the 
blood of Christ (chap. v. 18-20).—Ver. 10. The 
glory of the legal ministry was by itself intolera- 
ble for its brightness; but when the ministration 
of condemnation and the ministration of righte- 
ousness are combined together, that which was 
so glorious becomes unglorified, and Sinai’s ra- 
diance vanishes before that of Golgotha.—Ver. 11. 
The ministry which vanished away passed 
‘through glory,” and its glory was extinguished 
when the law had accomplished its end in Christ 
and His people; but the ministry which remains 
until the coming of the Lord abides in glory, that 
the whole world may behold its inherent excel- 
lence. 

Vers. 4-11. Lesson for the 12th Sunday after 
Trinity. Hrusner:—I. The glory of the evan- 
gelical ministry: 1. In its origin: a. It rests 
upon Christ’s own institution (ver. 4); ὁ. Christ 
alone can qualify us for it; 2. In its object: it is 
not of the letter, but of the Spirit; 3. In its 
means: it relies upon, not an external glory, 
which for a while blinds the eye and then van- 
ishes away (ver. 7), but the codperation of the 
Holy Ghost (vers. 8and 9); 4. In its reward: a. 
even in*this world it has more glorious rewards 
than any other employment (ver. 10); ὁ. but 
finally it conducts to eternal blessedness. II. 
The superior glory of the Church under the New 
Testament above that of the Church under the 
Old Testament: 1. It was founded by the Son, 
and not merely by the servant of God; 2. It is 
the ascendancy of the Spirit, and not of the let- 
ter; 3. Its worship and dignities are of a spiritual 
nature, and are sustained not merely by worldly 
influences; 4. It will continue forever.—OrTTIN- 
GER:—The glory of spiritual instruction and the 
weakness of that teaching which has reference 
merely to morality, the law and the outward let- 
ter (Serm. on the Epist. for the 12th Sunday af- 
ter Trinity).—A. F. Scumipt:—We should never 
separate by arbitrary and nice distinctions what 
God has wisely and graciously arranged toge- 
ther; especially: a. letter and Spirit (ver. 6) ; 
ὃ. the preaching of the law and of the gospel 
(ver. 8); 6. confidence in God and despair of our- 
selves (vers. 4 and 5); d. fidelity to our calling 
and an assurance of success, 


δά THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
pk a a a at ee ὑξενοο κ ΘΒ ΞΘ. 


VII.—DIFFERENT RESULTS OF THE TWO KINDS OF MINISTRY. HARDENING OF THE 
JEWS. 


CuaprTer III. 12-18. 


Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness [unreservedness] ot 
speech: And not as Moses, [om. which] put a veil over his! face, that the children of 
Israel could [might] not steadfastly look to [upon] the end of that which is abolished: 
But their minds were blinded [hardened]: for until this day? remaineth the same 
veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament; which veil is done away in 
Christ [upon the reading of the Old Testament remains the same veil untaken away, 
because it is taken away (only) in Christ]. But even unto this day, when Moses is 
read’, the veil is [lies, χεῖται upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall turn 
[turns] to the Lord, the veil shall be [is] taken away. Now the Lord is that [the] 
Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord 7s (om. there]}* ¢s liberty. But we all, with 
open [unveiled] face beholding as in a glass [mirror] the glory of the Lord, are 
changed into the same image from glory to glory, [om. even] as by the Spirit of the 
Lord [the Lord, the Spirit]. 


1 Ver. 13.—Rec. has éavrod; but the best authorities have αὐτοῦ. [Since our author wrote, the authority of Sin. has 
been added to that of Ὁ. K., and Chrysost., and Theodt., (Osiander, Bloomt.), in favor of ἑαυτοῦ. A. B.C. F. L., 4 cursives 
one MS. of Chrys., Damasc., Theophyl. and Oecum., (Lachm., Tisch., Alf., Meyer, Words.), are for αὐτοῦ. Ὁ. (1st Cor.) and 
F. omit τὸ before μὴ.]} 

2 Ver. 14.—The best authorities insert ἡμέρας. [Omitted as superfluous, comp. ver. 15. D. E.¥F. G. Chrys. (Ital. Vulg. 
etc. have in) instead of emt have ἐν. Ὅτι in Stephens and Griesb. is written ὅ τι, and it is translated in the old Ital. 
and Vulg. quoniam ; Wyclif.: “for it is avoided in Christ;” Rheims (in parenth.): “because in Christ it is made voide.”] 

3 Ver. 15.—Lachm. [Alford] following excellent authorities [A. B. C. Sin. οὐ al.] has ἂν ἀναγινώσκηται. But some [D. 
E.] have the subjunctive ἀναγινώσκηται without av; and others have the Indicative—-xerar with the av. The first syllable 
of ἄναγιν. was probably written first by mistake twice; then the verb was made to agree with it in the subjunctive, and 


12 
13 


14 


15 
16 
17 
18 


sometimes it remained so when the ἄν was erased, it being looked upon as governed still by the ἡνίκα (Meyer). 
4 Ver. 17.—Rec. has ἐκεῖ before ἐλευθερία contrary to the oldest and best MSS. [A. B. C. Ὁ. (1st Cor.), Sinait. (1 Cor.), 


the Copt. version, and Cyril and Nyssa. 
(2d 


according to the analogy of Matth. xviii. 20, xxiv. 28; James iii. 16, εὐ al, 


Comp. iiom. iv. 15, and v. 20. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 12, 13. Having, therefore, such 
hope.—The ἐλπὶς (hope) has reference to the 
future glory of the New Testament ministry as 
it had been alluded to in ver. 8. This glory had 
been called permanent in ver. 11, and was to be 
for the glorification of Christ when he should 
come to judgment. Some interpreters regard 
ver. 6 ff. as a digression, and think that we have 
here a resumption of the subject (οὖν) there 
broken off, and that ἐλπίς is here equivalent to 
πεποίϑησις there. This is, however, directly op- 
posed to the peculiar and essential signification 
of ἐλπίς, and to the connection. [That trust, 
even if we regard it as ‘‘filled out into hope by 
the intervening vision of the glory of his work” 
(Stanley), had reference rather to the results of 
his work, while this hope looked forward to 
something future and undeveloped]. The there- 
fore (ovv) introduces us to the practical results 
which were to follow the glorious ministration 
of the Gospel, and τοιαύτην (such) indicates the 
greatness or superiority of the hope.— We use 
great boldness of speech.—The whole tenor 
of the discourse shows us that παῤῥησία cannot 
mean the internal confidence or joyfulness which 
the Apostle felt, but the frank, open and unre- 
served manner which characterized his outward 
deportment, and the plainness or perspicuity 
(evidentia) which distinguished his addresses. 
[Curysostom: ‘We speak out everywhere with 
all freedom, abating, concealing, mistrusting 
nothing; with confidence, as if we had no idea 





Lachm., Tisch. and Alford reject it, but Griesb. inserted it on the authority of D, 
and 3d Cor.) Ε΄ F. G. K. L. Sinait. (3d Cor ) Goth. and Syr. versions and most of the Greek Fathers]. It was inserted 


But Paul does not commonly use it after οὗ, 


that we should injure your sight as Moses did 
that of the Israelites.” The Greek word παῤῥησία 
embraces the three ideas of openness, candor, 
and boldness. Moses’ address was interrupted 
by intervals of concealment, and was constantly 
reserved on account of his want of full confidence 
in his people. We have no reason for fears, dis- 
trust or concealment]. The connection is: The 
glory which is connected with the New Testa- 
ment ministry, makes us unreserved in our com- 
munications with the people, and induces us to 
present divine truth unveiled before them. The 
very spirit of our religion also demands this, for 
God’s people could never reach the glorious pri- 
vileges he has promised them without an oppor- 
tunity of looking freely and without reserve 
upon all that our system of religion contains. 
(Emmerling).—The phrase χρῆσϑαι παῤῥησία oc- 
«curs more than once in Plato. The idea con- 
tained in παῤῥησία ypdueda (Indicative, not 
Subjunctive) is carried out into more detail in 
ver. 13, though negatively by referring to an 
opposite kind of proceeding by Moses.—And 
not as Moses put a veil over his face.— 
This principal sentence is elliptical, because its 
predicate is to be found in the incidental re- 
mark made in connection with it. Such an 
ellipsis may be found in other Greek writings, 
but must here be supplied from the words used 
and the connection following. We may supply 
after καὶ ov, simply ποιοῦμεν (we do), or more 
freely, τίϑεμεν κάλυμμα ἐπὶ τὸ πρόσωπον ἡμῶν 
(we put a veil over our faces). The allusion is 
to a veiling process, quite different from the 
great boldness which had just been professed. 


CHAP. III. 12-18. 
a an ee ETT nT at ee Ie OPTS Tre ea ee 


It is said that Moses put over his face a covering 
(veil) ; that the children of Israel might not gaze 
at (clearly see) the end of that which is passing 
away. By τέλος τοῦ καταργουμένου is meant either 
the end, the literal fading away of the splendor 
which was on Moses’ face (though such a view 
would not correspond with the subsequent part 
of the representation); the end of that splendor 


_ regarded as the symbol of the whole Old Testa- 


ment ministration (office) and possibly of the 
Old Testament dispensation (Religion) itself; or 
(throwing aside the whole idea of a symbol) of 
the ministration or institution itself; or the end 
of Moses himself as the representative of that 
institution (in which case the masculine would 
not agree with the neuter τὸ xarapy. of ver. 11); 
or the design, the purpose which that ministra- 
tion or even the law itself was established to 
accomplish, the result to which that institution 
led, and for which it was prepared, viz., the di- 
vine glory to be unveiled in Christ, and of which 
the veiled radiance on Moses’ face was a symbol 
and reflection. (Comp. vv. 14, 18, chap. iv. 4, 6). 
Well established usage will not permit us to take 
πρὸς TO μὴ ἀτενίσαι echatically [implying a mere 
consequence of a course of action, without refe- 
rence to the views of the actors] in the sense of: 
s0 that, but we are obliged to understand by 
them the aim or purpose which the agents had 
in view. In every instance in which the phrase 
occurs in the New Testament it probably has re- 
ference to a subjective Divine purpose (comp. 
Meyer), and not toa merely objective result of 
divine arrangements. And yet we may suppose 
that so great a prophet as Moses, profoundly ac- 
quainted with the general scheme of the Divine 
administration, may have known that he was 
fulfilling a divine purpose, or at least that he was 
promoting such a result. That he was practising 
an intentional deception (Fritzsche), or was 
guilty of an improper dissimulation, the Apostle 
was far fromimplying. Even if we make the end 
of that which is passing away, refer tothe end of 
Moses’ ministry (comp. ver. 11), and suppose that 
Moses saw that end (τέλος) typified by the dis- 
appearance of the radiance from his face, such a 
covert proceeding (¢ecte agere) must be regarded 
simply as a pedagogic or disciplinary course of 
conduct. The same may be said of an interpre- 
tation proposed by Meyer (but which need not 
include a reference to a Rabbinic allegory), ac- 
cording to which Paul recognizes in τέλος, what 
he afterwards brings out more fully, viz., a judi- 
cial or retributive proceeding, at least on God’s 
part. This implies that a sight of the Divine ra- 
diance on Moses’ face was withheld from the 
children of Israel, because their previous con- 
duct had made them unworthy of such a fayor. 
Such a concealment was a symbolical represen- 
tation of the fact that in consequence of their 
sins, Moses, 7. e., the law represented by him, or 
the Scriptures of the Old Testament read by 
them, would remain so veiled before them, that 
they could never perceive the Divine glory which 
rested especially upon those Scriptures and those 
rites which testified of Christ; and accordingly 
they would continue in unbelief and haye no part 
in the salvation by Christ. Neanper: ‘The 
mind of the Apostle was entirely taken up with 
the symbolical meaning of this incident. Moses 








δᾶ 





is in his eye simply a symbol of the whole legal 
economy, and from this point of view everything 
in the history is regarded. The covering which 
Moses used to conceal his face, represents the 
entire veil of symbols under which divine things 
were represented. As long as these divine things 
could be seen only in the light of the Old Testa- 
ment, there was no way of distinguishing eternal 
truth from the temporary form in which it was 
represented to men (essence and symbol). The 
contrast here implied may therefore be carried 
out thus: we who make known the Gospel to 
men need never fear that its glory may some day 
come to an end. We may allow our hearers the 
clearest and freest inspection of its mysteries, 
and its radiance will only shine forth the more 
brightly.’’* 

[‘‘ The whole subsequent section (14—18) is 
parenthetical. Before and after it, the ministry 
is the subject; in it, they to whom the ministry is 
directed. But it serves to-show the whole spirit 
and condition of the two classes, and thus further 
to substantiate the character of openness and 
freedom asserted of the Christian ministry” 
(Atrorp)]. 

Vers. 14-16. But their minds (mental per- 
ceptions) were hardened (made callous).— 
The words distinctly announce that this was a 
divine judgment. Novara signifies not the al- 
ready formed thoughts (chap. ii. 11), but as in 
chap. iv. 4; xi. 3, the spiritual sense, the power 


[ Without resorting to the explanation that Paul was 
here allegorizing to such an extent as to be inconsistent 
with the literal account in Ex. xxxiy. 29-35, we have only 
to give a correct translation of the original Hebrew of that 
account to get clear of all difficulties. Such a correct trans- 
lation was given by the Septuagint, which was evidently used 
by Paul, for he has in every corresponding place of our pas- 
sage, used the very words of that version. (comp. Words- 
worth). According to the history in Exodus, Moses came 
down from the mountain with his face irradiated; and when 
the people shrunk from him, he put over his face a veil 
(either the Kenaa, which covered the whole head and was 
in subsequent times worn by persons of eminence, as by 
Mahomet, Mokanna and others, or the Letham, which con- 
cealed only the face, comp. Rosenmueller), at first, to relieve 
their fears, but afterwards, in his ordinary intercourse with 
them (vy. 34 and 35) to conceal from them the termination 
(τέλος) of the radiance, or its cessation until he went again 
into the Divine presence. Our English version translates 
the three first Hebrew words of ver. 33 thus: “And dill 
Moses had done speaking; and other Protestant versions 
render the verb in the last part of the verse in a Pluperfect 
sense, and translate: “he had put on a veil.” This makes 
the historian say that Moses did not put on the veil until he 
had ceased speaking to the people, and that he resumed it 
when he reéntered the Divine presence, which is in direct 
contradiction to Paul’s view. The true rendering of the 
Hebrew and the Sept. is: “and when he had made an end 
(Piel) of speaking with them, he puta veil en his face.” The 
Vulgate is correct in its rendering of this verse (tmpletisque 
sermonibus, nosuit velamen super factem suam), but a confu- 
sion is thrown upon the whole by its strange mistake in 


translating ΠΡ (a denominative verb, signifying to emit 
ee 


rays, from ΠΡ a horn) as if it signified, to have horns 


(ignorabat quod cornuta esset facies sua). Paul’s use of this 
incident as an illustration (not an allegory) of the people’s 
inability to endure the full glory of Divine truth and the 
consequent veiling of that truth under the types and shad- 
ows of the Old Dispensation, is perfectly natural. But as 
Clemens Alex. remarks, this veil was simply against the 
reading of the Old Testament while the heart remained rudo 
and unsusceptible, and not κατὰ τὴν πρὸς τὸν Κύριον ἐπιστρο- 
φήν, ἱ. e., not against those who were inclined to see Christ 
in the Gospel, and to return to that Lord who was concealed 
behind that veil. Stanley in Comm. and in his Leett. on the 
Jewish Church Ist series, p.72, and in his article on Moses 
in Smith’s Dict. Also Hodge ou Corr. and Rosenmueller ou 
Ex. xxxiy, 29-35 


56 





used in thinking and willing (Beck, Seelenl. p. 
59), or the various activities of the vovc ( Meyer). 
We may furthermore conceive (retaining the sig- 
nification usualty given: thoughts, intellectual 
perceptions), that these powers become petrified 
or hardened, ἐς ¢., are put so completely into 
stocks, and made immovable, that they no longer 
yield to pressure, and can make no progress to- 
ward that clear knowledge on which everything 
depends. Πωροῦν, (from Πῶρος, callus, an indu- 
ration of the skin which destroys all sensibility), 
obdurare, to harden, to blunt (Isa. vi. 10; Mark 
vi. 52; viii. 17), is sometimes used with respect 
to the heart (καρδία. Rom. xi. 25), and sometimes 
of the Jews (οἱ λοιποί). Weare left in doubt 
when this hardening took place, for this depends 
upon the relation given to ἀλλά. If this has re- 
ference to παῤῥησία χρώμεϑα, and particularly to 
kai ov (ver. 13), meaning: ‘‘We act in an open 
manner, with no such concealment as Moses 
practised, and yet their νοήματα have become 
hardened,” we must suppose that the hardening 
had but recently taken place when the Apostle 
wrote. But if we refer it to πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἀτενίσαι, 
(i. ¢., to their gazing, edc.), the hardening must 
have taken place in Moses’ time, though the sub- 
sequent remarks show that it had continued to 
the Apostle’s own time. It is in favor of the 
latter reference, that the veil is immediately after- 
wards the subject of discourse. In this case it 
is said directly that the minds of the people 
were hardened, that they might, not look upon 
the end (scope, object) of that which is abolished. 
He proves and illustrates his position, that the 
hardening was not abolished, by an appeal to the 
actual facts before their eyes, in the condition of 
the nation at the time he was speaking:—for 
until this day, the same veil remains on 
the reading of the Old Covenant.—That 
these facts resulted from the same causes which 
were in action in Moses’ day, he asserts by 
saying that the same veil (rd αὐτὸ κάλυμμα) 
remains: for as a yeil was interposed between 
the divine radiance on Moses’ face and the eyes 
of the Israelites, so has the divine radiance of 
the Old Covenant been concealed from that people 
down to the period in which he was writing. [It 
is not directly implied that this veil was over the 
heart, under the preaching of the Gospel. The 
reference is solely to the Israelitish nation under 
the hearing and reading of the Old Covenant. 
But the change of the medium of communication 
makes necessary a change of figure. After Mo- 
ses oral communications ceased—it was a book 
which spoke to them. The reagon any do not see 
the glory when they read, is not in the book 
which addresses them, but in the heart of the 
reader. The active influence which obstructed 
the proper understanding of the truth was in 
the other direction, and the veil had to be on the 
heart. Comp. Alford.] Itis as if a veil had been 
thrown over the reading, for the great truths of 
the Old Covenant were not recognized even when 
they were plainly read, and the glory of God ac- 
tually contained in that dispensation remained a 
mystery tothem. [In opposition to Theodoret, 
who maintains that the power which hardens, 
was entirely from within the heart itself, Meyer 
endeavors to show that the passive ἐπωρώϑη clearly 
implies that the hardening was the act of an- 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





other (comp. Rom, xi. 7). The word signifies 
blindness (as in our authorized English version) 
ouly by a double metaphor, ὁ. 6., by supposing 
that the intellect and heart lose their perceptive 
power. Chrysostom says the nation became “ τὸ 
παχὺ kai χαμαίζηλον, stupid and grovelling,” be- 
cause they prided themselves on the superior 
glory of Moses.] ’Ez: may refer either to place, 
2. €., over the reading, which would here corres- 
pond to the face of Moses when he spoke to the 
people; or (better) to dime, 7. e., during the read- 
ing. Comp. ver. 15, ἡνίκα ἀναγϊνωσκεται, ete. We 
meet with the phrase παλαιὰ διαϑήκη (Old Cove- 
nant) nowhere else in the New Testament; and 
it must here designate, not the original Serip- 
tures, the collection of books which now bear the 
name, but the Covenant itself; the substance of 
what was read in the synagogues (the writings 
of Moses and the Prophets), whose types and 
promises contained the divine glory afterwards 
revealed in Christ. [Such an expression shows 
how deep was Paul’s conviction, that that ancient 
covenant was now becoming antiquated, and was 
about to be superseded. ] 

In the remaining part of ver. 14, μὴ ἀνακα- 
λυπτόμενον may be construed as if the participle 
were to be taken absolutely—it not being un- 
veiled (or discovered to them) that it (the Old 
Covenant) is done away in Christ.—Or, inas- 
much as it remained concealed from the Jews that 
the Old Covenant was to be abrogated in conse- 
quence of the appearance and work of Christ (Rom, 
x.4; Col.ii.14). Such an expression would be a 
particular determination of what had been meant 
by saying that the same veil remains, e/ec. These 
words may, however, be joined with the previous 
words so as to say: ‘‘the same veil in the read- 
ing of the OldCovenant remains not taken away,” 
and then ὅτε ἐν χριςτῷ καταργεῖται" gives us the 
reason: ‘because it is taken away in Christ.” 
That this would actually take place only in Christ 
was a self-evident thing to the Apostle and his 
readers; and that this ‘only’ is sufficiently in- 
dicated by the emphasis which must be Jaid upon 
ἐν χριστῷ, cannot be doubted. Itis very natural, 
however, from the example of ver. 13, to refer 
καταργεῖται to the Old Covenant, and an entirely ἡ 
different word (περιαιρεῖται) is used with respect 
to the removal of the veil. On the other hand 
the structure of the sentence makes it natural to 
connect ἀνακαλυπτόμενον with κάλυμμα; and even 
if we have a right to use the participle in this 
case absolutely (since it is not common for any 
verbs to be used in this way except: ἐξόν, εἰρημένον, 
and such like), it is hard to justify the use of 
ἀνακαλυπτξιν in this absolute manner, inasmuch 
as everywhere else it has with it an accusative 
of the object. The attempt which Riickert has 
made to combine the two constructions together, 
and to make the Apostle say: ‘‘and will not be 
taken away, that they (the people) might see 
that it (the Old Covenant) has its end in Christ,” 
has no claim to our acceptance. The reading ὃ τέ, 
which Luther [and our Eng. translators] followed, 
and which makes the nature of the covering itself 
the reason for its not being removed (—guippe 
quod, Meyer) has opposed to it all the old versions, 
whose testimony on such a point should have 
especial importance. The positive contrast to 


ι the negative μὴ ἀνακαλυπτ. is given in ver. 16— 


CHAP. ITI. 12-18. 





But even until this day when Moses is 
read, a veil lies upon their heart.—This 
means, according to the previous construction, 
either, ‘‘it will not be disclosed that, ete., but 
until this day the veil is upon their hearts;” or 
‘‘and will not be discovered, because it will be 
taken away in Christ, but until this day a cover- 
ing lies,” ete. The latter interpretation would 
not seem to have required the repetition of 
κάλυμμα. The want of the article may be ac- 
counted for on both interpretations on the ground 
that the veil is transposed from the object looked 
upon to the persons looking. This change may 
have been in the Apostle’s mind when he wroie 
ver. 14, if ἐπὶ (7m avayv.) be taken with respect 
to time, and then the present clause is only a 
more complete definition of that idea. In no 
case (even if ἐπὶ has the sense of on or over) 
could the Apostle have spoken of two coverings 
in order to imply a high degree of incapacity. 
This would have required an additional καί be- 
fore ἐπὶ τὴν καρδ. αὐτῶν. This is the only time 
ἡνίκα is found. in the New Testament, but in the 
Sept. it occurs frequently, and in this very pas- 
sage in Ex. xxxiv. 34 it is used in the sense of a 
space ef time —when. The name Μωῦσῆς signi- 
fies here the writings of Moses. The covering 
said to be extended [‘‘ κεῖται ἐπὶ with the accusa- 
tive* pregnans: involving the being laid on and 
remaining there’’—-ALrorp] over the hearts of 
the people, signifies not an obstruction to their 
moral powers ἢ. 6., of the will, but a defect in 
the intellectual faculties of understanding.—But 
when it turns unto the Lord the veilis 
taken away (ver. 16).—Here the veil in fact 
is said to be removed in consequence of an act of 
the will. The heart (καρδία), which is the sub- 
ject of ἐπιστρέψη (for as τὶς or Ἰσραηλ have not 
yet been mentioned, they cannot be made such a 
subject), seems to be regarded here in two as- 
pects: first as the seat of intelligence, and then 
as the seat of the will or of self-determination. 
The ἐπιστρέφειν ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον, is the turning of 
one’s self to Christ, and this is a conversion just 
as far as it had been preceded by a turning 
away. In the rejection of the Lord the heart 
of the children of Israel was regarded as com- 
pletely apostate, and hence its conversion to 
Christ would be looked upon as a return to the 
Lord. This conversion is supposed to have taken 
place before the veil is taken away, inasmuch as 
the latter is said to be the consequence of the 
former (ἡνίκα av). Luther’s translation: «Wenn 





ΓΞ Of the three explanations given of μὴ ἀνακαλυπτ. that 
of Luther and our Eng. version is now τὶ iversally given up 
by all critical scholars for want of authority for its reading, 
That of our author (“the veil remains untalen away be- 
cause it (the veil) is removed (only) by Christ’) is adopted 
by most of the ancient expositors, de Wette, Neander, 
Wordsworth and Hodge, but is weakened by the awkward- 
ness of saying that the κάλυμμα is μὴ ἀνακαλυπτόμενον, 
by this transitive participle having no object, by καταργ. 
being used three times (vv. 7, 11, 13) with reference to the 
Old Covenant, and by the fact that it is not the veil but the 
dispensation which the Apostle is saying was abolished by 
Christ. On the other hand the third explanation (“the veil 
remains not te” en away in the reading of the Old Covenant, 
it not being unyeiled to them that it (the Old Covenant) is 
done away in Chri: ?’) is adopted by Chrysostom, Meyer, 
Bloomfield, Osiander, Conybeare. Alford and Stanley, makes 
antural use of ἀνακαλ. since the end of the O. T. was the 
very thing which was under a veil: makes good sense; and 
has only the difficulty of the absolute participle, but is quite 
consistent with the symbolism of the entire section. Comp. 
Sapecially Stanley and Hodge. 


| 


| 





57 


er «..--.Ξ.--. “ὦ. 


es sich bekehrte, so wiirde,” etc., (if it shall turn,, 
the veil will, efe.), is incorrect, and would 
not perhaps have been made had the author 
of it not been influenced, probably unconsci- 
ously, by the idea that such a conversion be-- 
fore the removal of the veil was impossible. But. 
the same assertion is found manifestly in Rom. 
xi. 25 ff. The Apostle is not speaking of those- 
individual conversions which take place in every 
age. But when this general conversion shall. 
be brought about, when that aversion to Christ. 
which springs from a carnal mind and proud: 
self-righteousness shall be overcome, and when,, 
consequently, they shall confidingly and with. 
sincere acknowledgements of their guilty error: 
and unbelief, turn to Him, they will clearly dis-- 
cover as they read the Old Testament that it. 
everywhere bears testimony for Christ. The: 
Divine glory really contained in its types and. 
prophecies, and now more fully revealed in. 
Christ himself, will shine so clearly that they- 
will be able to look upon it with a steadfast gaze.. 
The expression reminds us of Ex. xxxiy. 34. In. 
the mind of the Apostle the removal of the cover- 
ing from Moses’ face when he went again into: 
the Divine presence seemed a type of the future 
removal of Israel’s blindness. Ilepsacpév con-- 
tains an intimation that the veil was completely, 
around the heart. [As this is the verb used in. 
the Sept. of Ex. xxxiv. 34, and as mepinpécto-: 
there and almost uniformly throughout that ver- 
sion can be taken only in an active sense, Stan- 
ley contends that the word here (περιαιρξιται)" 
should have an active and not a, passive sense: 
(strips off—not, is stript off). He also thinks. 
that the only nominative which both ἐπιστρέψῃ: 
and περίαρξιται can have is Μωῦσῆς (and in this 
Calvin and Estius agree with him), since Ἰσραὴλ 
is too remote, and ἡ καρδία is not sufficiently pro- 
minent. He thinks that then each clause begin- 
ning with ἡνίκα will correspond, and thatthe paral- 
lel with Ex. xxxiy. 34 willbe preserved. He takes. 
Moses as the representative of not only the Old. 
Covenant but of the nation, and makes the sense: 
to be: ‘* when Moses, in the person of his people, 
turns again to Him who is our Lord now as he: 
went of old time to Him who was their Lord in 
Sinai, then he strips off the veil from his face and. 
from their hearts, and then the perishable nature 
of the law will be made manifest in the full blaze: 
of the Divine glory.” But 7 καρδία is quite as: 
natural a subject for ἐπιστρέψῃ, and as likely to; 
be prominent in the Apostle’s mind as Mwioje,. 
and the idea of ἐπιστρέψῃ is certainly that of a. 
thorough conversion, and not a mere change of’ 
opinion about the law. The careful adoption by: 
the Apostle of the words of the Sept., some of 
which were strange to him, shows that he was: 
closely copying the imagery of the history; and: 
he here intends to say, that as Moses had on a 
veil when his face was turned away from God, 
and took it off when he went in to God, so the: 
heart of the people when turned from the Lord: 
was veiled, and when it turned to him had the: 
veil removed. Both ἐπιστρέψη and repiarp, should 
be rendered as an indefinite present and not in 
the future as in the authorized version. The 
turning and removing of the veil was in process 
of completion. The process was continually 
going on by the turning of individuals in every 


58 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
SE a a 


age, though the general conversion was in the { the impediments of a fleshly nature, is included) 


distant future. ] 

Vers. 17-18.—Now the Lord is the 
Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord 
is, is liberty—(ver. 17). This sentence is con- 
nected with ver. 16, and explains or gives the 
reason for what is said there. We have in facta 
syllogism, though its several members are not 
given in their regular order. The major premise 
is: Where the Spirit of the Lord is, is freedom; 
the minor is: as the Lord is the Spirit, whoever 
turns to the Lord has that Spirit; and the con- 
clusion is: therefore such a one must be free, 
and will no more be enveloped by the covering 
which veils and checks the action of the soul 
(Meyer). It is evident from ver. 18 that the 
liberty connected with the removal of the cover- 
ing which obstructed the people’s open insight 
into the divine glory, is not a new subject of 
discourse foreign to what had been discussed, as 
e. g., 2 freedom from the yoke of the law (though 
this must be virtually communicated during such 
an insight). ‘O dé κύριος is intimately connected 
with ver. 16: ‘But the Lord, to whom their 
heart thus turns, is the Spirit.” Many artificial 
explanations have been given of this verse. With- 
out noticing those attempts which have been in 
direct contradiction to the meaning of the words 
and the scope of the context, (one of which went 
so far as to conjecture that the reading must have 
been ov δὲ κύριος) we find here such an identifica- 
tion of Christ and the Holy Spirit, that the Lord, 
to whom the heart turns, is in no practical re- 
spect different from the Holy Spirit received in 
conversion. The fellowship of Christ into which 
it entered, when it turned to the Lord, was in 
truth the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. Christ 
is virtually the Spirit, inasmuch as He communi- 
cates Himself in conversion, and at other times 
by means of the Spirit; the Holy Spirit is His 
spirit: the animating principle of the Lord’s in- 
dwelling and influence in the hearts of believers 
is this Holy Spirit (comp. Rom. viii. 9 ff.; Gal. ii. 
20, iv. 6; Phil. i. 19; Acts xx. 28 comp. with 
Eph. iv. 11; John xiv. 18 et. al.). In favor of 
this explanation is the immediately following 
phrase: ov dé τὸ πνεῦμα κυρίου (where the Spirit 
of the Lord is), in which we may notice also, 
that the article before πνεῦμα indicates that every 
thing which is certainly the work of the Spirit, 
must be exclusively from Christ (Neander). But 
such a virtual identification of Christ and the 
Spirit, can have reference only to Christ in His 
state of exaltation (comp. 1 Cor. xy. 45); for it 
is only in that state that He is the independent 
source of all divine light and power to the bodies 
and souls of believers. He is then no longer 
dependent upon any source beyond Himself, for 
the divine light and power which he possesses 
or dispenses: and the Son of man is no longer 
the Son of God in a state of self-renunciation, 
dependent upon the influences of the Spirit, but 
a perfect centre of divine fulness. Hence, we 
may say of Him: he is the Spirit, (not merely 
quasi) because he is glorified in the spiritual 
world. From this it moreover follows (for the 
‘idea is essential to that of the Spirit of God), 
that the new birth, (in which what is here called 





must have its source in Him. He it is who makes 
like Himself those who turn to Him, and from 
Him proceeds the pure free light of life (the 
truth which makes us free). Hence no sooner 
is it said that the Lord is the Spirit than He 
is called the Spirit of the Lord. [Paul had 
been speaking of a spirituality in the ancient 
dispensation, which had been entirely missed 
by the ancient Jews. This abstract spirituality 
he wished to connect with a concrete reality, and 
hence he here says that the Lord (to whom the 
heart of the people must turn) is that Spirit. 
Even this Lord, he also wishes to identify (not 
in his essential nature, but in his activity in this 
special department) with the Holy Spirit (who, 
the next verse shows, is here meant). Comp. 
Alford. The ancient fathers (especially Chry- 
sostom and Augustine, see Wordsworth) were 
led by their extreme dogmatic zeal to press this 
verse into a proof of the Holy Spirit’s divinity. 
They almost universally construed τὸ πνεῦμα as 
the subject, and ὁ κύριος as the predicate of thesen- 
tence. Grammatically this is allowed to be per- 
haps possible, (Alford, Meyer), but it is evidently 
forced, and the sentiment so expressed would be 
entirely foreign to the course of the Apostle’s 
argument. It is only inferentially from the iden- 
tity of our Lord’s and the Spirit’s operations, 
that such a doctrine here enters]. In ver. 18 he 
refers still further to the way in which this free- 
dom, which has its source in the Lord and his 
Spirit, is produced among those who believe in 
Christ. In illustrating this he now recurs to the 
figure of the glory and the free looking upon it. 
—But we all with open face.—The object 
of dé is, not to put what was now to be said in 
contrast with what had been said of the Israel- 
ites or of Moses, (as if his idea was: ‘this is 
true not only of one, but of all,’’) but simply to 
indicate a continuance of the discourse. Ἡμεῖς 
(we) includes not merely the Apostle and his 
fellow-laborers, or the Apostle and all who preach 
the Gospel (Catholics appeal to chap. iv. 1, and 
contrast πάντες (all) with the single individual 
Moses), but all believers, who, the connection 
shows, must be included in the πάντες. (Chap iv. 
38and6). Incorrespondence with the removal of 
the veiland the liberty of which he had been speak- 
ing, he now speaks of an open or unveiled face 
(ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπῳ). This implies that the 
covering which had been extended over the heart 
of the people might be taken off, and that the 
spiritual face might thus be freed from the veil 
which prevented its vision of the glory. In con- 
sistency with this, must be our explanation of 
the next clause:—beholding in a glass— 
(κατοπτριζόμενοι). This word, which is not found 
at allin the Septuagint, and oecurs in the New 
Testament. only in this place, has the sense in the 
active voice of: to show in a mirror, or, as ina 
mirror, to reflect; and in the middle: to refleet 
one’s self, to see one’s self in a glass [WINER, @ 
39, 3; Jerr., 2 362 ff.]. With reference to the 
example of Moses, we may interpret the words 
thus: we show to ourselves in a mirror the glory 
of the Lord; and in doing so we are not veiled 
as Moses, but we have uncovered faces. We are 


liberty, i. ¢., the free action of the mind, a free | compelled, however, by both the preceding and 
dniuition of the divine glory, and a release from | the succeeding context, to think of a looking οἷ, 


CHAP. III. 12-18. 





believers, 1, in contrast with the Israelites, who 
were kept from looking upon the Divine glory by 
a covering upon their hearts; and 2, with refer- 
ence to the being changed (μεταμορφούμεϑα) con- 
nected with this looking (comp. 1 Jno. iii. 2). 
Κατοπτρίζεσϑαι has therefore the meaning in this 
place of: to perceive as in a mirror (we meet 
with the word in this sense in Philo.; see 
Meyer). There is no imperfection of vision ne- 
cessarily implied here, as in 1 Cor. xiii. 12. The 
glass is not the internal spirit, ὁ. e., the heart of 
the believer (for the eye which looks is supposed 
to be there), but the Gospel—The glory of 
the Lord (i. 6., of Christ, not of God) is the 
representation which is given of Christ’s life, 
greatness, power, loveliness, etc. (Beck, Christl. 
Lehrwiss. I., p. 67), or of His grace and truth 
Jno. i. 14), His holiness and Divine fulness 
Col. ii. 9), as these were manifested among men. 
These are exhibited to us in the Gospel as in a 
mirror. And as we look into this by faith, freely 
and unobstructed by any covering of a fleshly 
mind (such as impeded the vision of the Jews)— 
we are changed into the same image.— 
The image here is the image of the Lord, and 
that with which it is said to be identical (αὐτὴν), 
is not the πάντες (as if he would thus say that all 
were made alike), but that which they had been 
said to look upon, viz., the very same image which 
we all behold, for we all behold the glory of the 
Lord as in a mirror. While thus looking we 
shall be changed: we shall be like Him, for we 
shall see Him as Heis (1 Jno. iii. 2; comp. Rom. 
viii. 29). Neander: ‘We have here a beautiful 
contrast: the Jews who looked with covered 
faces upon the glory in Moses’ face, did not 
really look into it, and so remained as they were 
before, unchanged. But when Christians look 
with unveiled faces upon the image of God in 
Christ, this very looking implies that they are 
already in communion with Christ, and neces- 
sarily reacts upon their internal and spiritual 
life. The more they penetrate by such a be- 
lieving contemplation the Divine glory, the more 
will their hearts be pervaded by what they be- 
hold.” There is no direct reference therefore to 
the final transformation which believers will ex- 
perience when Christ shall come in the Parousia, 
but only to the gradual assimilation to Christ 
_ which takes place in them during the present 
life: the becoming partakers of the Divine na- 
ture (2 Pet. i. 4) and the putting on, of Christ, 
and of the new man (Rom. xiii. 14; Eph. iv. 24). 
The accusative does not require that any word 
like κατά or εἰς should be understood; nor need 
the whole phrase be taken in an adverbial sense 
analogous to τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον (in this wise); 
for in the very idea it is implied that the develop- 
ment or change is according to a particular form 
(Meyer). In the phrase: from glory to glory, 
the words from glory (ἀπὸ ν»δόξης) may designate 
the causal source from which the influence pro- 
ceeds, t. 6., ‘the glory of the Lord; and to 
glory (εἰς δόξαν) the glory which is produced in 
us, that to which it brings us (comp. chap. ii. 
16); or the whole phrase may signify the con- 
tinuous development as it advances step by step. 
The former explanation receives support from 
the sentence which immediately follows:—as by 
the Lord the Spirit (καϑάπερ ἀπὸ κυρίου 








59 


πνεύματος). And yet the other explauation har- 
monizes very well with. μεταμορφούμεϑα, and on 
etymological grounds may readily be conceded, 
inasmuch as ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν would be quite ag 
allowable a form of speech as ἐκ δυνόμεως εἰς 
δύναμιν (Ps. Ixxxiv. 8). The καϑάπερ ἀπὸ κυρ. rv. 
may also be made to harmonize very well with 
this explanation: we shall be changed from one 
degree of glory to another just as might be ex- 
pected from the Lord (or according to the nature 
of what comes from the Lord). The καϑάπερ has 
a more forcible signification than ὡς, and denotes 
the agreement of the effect with the cause (like 
ὡς in chap. ii. 17). We may inquire whether 
πνεύματος in the phrase ἀπὸ κυρίου πτεύματος is 
dependent upon ἀπὸ and κυρίου upon πνεύματος 
[by the Spirit of the Lord], comp. ver. 17, 
πνεῦμα κυρίου; or whether πνεύματος is governed 
by κυρίου [by the Lord of the Spirit], in which 
case we may also inquire whether the words 
mvebu. and κυρ. are in the relation of dependence 
(by the Spirit which is from the Lord), or in that 
of apposition (by the Spirit who is the Lord). 
To govern πνεύματος directly by ἀπὸ is not allow- 
able evidently on account of the position of the 
words. We must certainly concede also that 
the relation of apposition is not as natural as 
that which is commonly given to the genitive. 
The relation of dependence which has commonly 
been acquiesced in for our passage gives us like- 
wise avery good sense: ‘‘very much as we might 
expect from one who is the Lord of the Spirit” 
(comp. κύριος τῆς δόξης in 1 Cor. ii. 8). Κυριος 
(Lord) furthermore implies that the Lord not 
only has or possesses the Spirit, but that He has 
complete power in this matter to direct in the 
dispensation and communication of the Spirit ac- 
cording to His pleasure in ever growing fulness. 
If we so construe it as to make this Spirit the 
same as the Holy Spirit, even that Divine agent 
is His Spirit (Rom. viii. 9 f.; Gal. iv. 6), for the 
Spirit is shed forth or sent, by and through Him 
(Tit. iii. 6; Acts ii. 88; Jno. xv. 26); so that 
the Spirit’s agency among men is dependent 
upon Him. If, however, the words are taken in 
a qualitative sense: ‘‘by one who is the Lord of 
the Spirit,” 7. ¢., of the Divine light of life, this 
Divine light of life is no other than the πτεῦμα 
ἅγιον which He communicates from the infinite 
fulness of His own Divine life. The want of the 
article before both κυρίου and πνεύματος makes 
this qualitative signification most probable. [As 
Meyer well remarks, however, this qualitative 
meaning is entirely inadmissible here, since 
throughout our passage the word πνεῦμα must 
mean the Holy Spirit (the Divine Spirit) in His 
personal subsistence]. Both interpretations, 
however, terminate in the same general sense. 
Neander: ‘Paul has before his mind in this pas- 
sage the whole course of the Christian’s progress, 
commencing here on earth and attaining its per- 
fection in the heavenly world.” 

Each prominent word in this passage has been 
made the object of special attention and difficulty. 
1. The object beheld, was the glory of the Lord. 
Paul had shown this to be Christ (ver. 17), but 
He is here contemplated as an image (εἰκόνα) in 
a mirror (not ‘a glass,” but κατόπτρον). An 
image is usually an imperfect likeness (1 Cor. 
xiii. 12), and the Gospel must imperfectly repre 


60 THE SECOND EPISTLE 





sent Him. It is not the objective and glorified 
Christ Himself that we see. 2. The act of behold- 
ing, is here (not ἀτενίζω, as with Moses, but) 
κατοπτρίζω. The rays are reflected and not di- 
rectly received (see Chrysostom’s beautiful com- 
parisons in the Hom. notes). The ancient exposi- 
tors usually interpreted this word in the sense of: 
reflecting as in a mirror, meaning that believers 
reflect the glory of the Lord, and they are fol- 
lowed by Luther, Olshausen, Billroth and Stan- 
ley. But most modern commentators have felt 
compelled to disregard their authority, high as 
it is on such a question, and to take the word in 
the sense of beholding as ina mirror. Though 
they have been able to appeal to but one well 
established quotation (Philo) to sustain them in 
such a usage, one instance especially in Alexan- 
drian Greek is sufficient, with the obvious neces- 
sities of the context, to warrant us in adopting 
such a meaning. Certainly no instance has been 
found in which the word has the meaning: 10 re- 
flect, and we can see no connection between reflect- 
ing the Divine image and being changed into the 
same. 8, The persons beholding, are many, “all 
(πάντες in contrast with one Moses), with open 
face.” Both Christ and the heart are ἀνακεκα- 
λυμμένοι. 4. The effect of the beholding is, ‘we 
are metamorphosed into the same image ”’ (accu- 
sative without a preposition to show the imme- 
diateness of the transition, and the present in- 
dic. to show the beginning but not the comple- 
tion of the change, Wessrer, Syn., pp. 81 ff.). All 
become like their Lord, and of course like one 
another. 65. The reason for the change, ‘as by the 
Lord the Spirit.” Suitably, as might be ex- 
pected from the Lord (καϑάπερ), and efficiently 
(ἀπὸ) from Him as the source of influence. We 
cannot but sympathize with Alford when he 
says of the rendering: the Lord of the Spirit, 
that it ‘seems to convey very little meaning, be- 
sides being altogether unprecedented.” We add 
that Paul had been preparing us for the expres- 
sion: the Lord the Spirit (apposition, the Lord 
who is the Spirit) by expressly showing that 
Christ was both the Lord and the Spirit of the 
Old Covenant (vers. 16, 17 and 18). Such an 
expression seems as grammatical and suitable as 
“from God the Father” (ἀπὸ ϑεοῦ πατρὸς) in 
Rom. i. 7; Eph. 1. 2; Phil. i. 2, οἱ alic. comp. 2 
Cor. i. 2]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Even in the understanding of revealed truth, 
there is a clear distinction between legal bondage 
and evangelical freedom. Until the mind gets 
extricated from that bondage it is concerned only 
with a multiplicity of special details; the living 
unity formed by the general truths, in which all 
these concentrate, is covered by a veil—and no 
proper conception of the divine system as a whole, 
is possible. The glory of Christ which constitutes 
the true aim of every part of God's word can 
never be appreciated or discovered by a heart 
thus confined and lowered, for such occupations 
will be like a veil over the internal eye. But no 
sooner does one attain the position of evange- 
lical freedom than his eye is opened upon the 
general system and principles of truth. And such 
& position is gained when the heart is turned to- 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ward Christ, in whom the fulness of the God 
head substantially dwells, all particular rays of 
truth concentrate, and each truth acquires a self- 
evidencing power. The moment we thus recog- 
nize and surrender our hearts to Christ, we re- 
nounce all idea of satisfaction in ourselves or our 
doings, and we lay hold on Christ as the only 
source of peace or life. The veil immediately drops 
from our spiritual face, the diyine glory in the 
Scriptures acquires a wonderful lustre, our souls 
become thoroughly enamored of God in Christ, 
and we begin to grow inio the image of holy love 
as it beams from the Gospel. A living likeness 
of Christ is formed within, old things pass away, 
and all things are created anew. A quickening 
light brightens up within us, from glory to glory 
unto the perfect day of the celestial life. 

2, This legal position may be illustrated in all 
those who turn from the more perfect revelation 
God has given us in the Gospel, but especially in 
the Jewish people still clinging to a dispensation 
which was intended to be only provisional and 
shadowy. In religious matters, their intellectual 
faculties have always been torpid and inflexible; 
and they seem unable to leave the schoolmaster, 
whose only business was to direct them to Christ 
himself (Gal. iii. 24). They know only the law 
as given by Moses, and nothing of grace and truth 
by Jesus Christ (John i. 17). By minute acts of 
obedience to many particular precepts they hope 
to merit the divine favor, and they fail of recog- 
nizing that righteousness of faith which renounces 
all merit and trusts to mere grace, though it was 
often illustrated in the lives of their own saints, 
and in all the dealings of God under the ancient 
covenant. In like manner when they contem- 
plated their prophetic Scriptures, their minds 
were occupied only with such particular expres- 
sions as best accorded with their carnal notions, 
and they failed to comprehend that general king- 
dom in which all such specifications find their 
right position and unity. But a time is coming 
when not only a few individuals, as in past and 
present times, but the whole nation shall become 
tired of such things, and with humble hearts and 
broken spirits shall turn to Him who was pro- 
mised and offered first, and who still offers Himself, 
to them as their Messiah. In His own time He will 
so present Himself to them, that they will confess 
with shame, that He, and He alone, is their Mes- 
siah; with a free and clear insight they will read 
that Word which has so long been a sealed book 
(Isa, xxix. 10 ff); the covering shall be taken 
away from their hearts; and they will look with 
unveiled faces upon that Christ who is not only 
their true Lord, but the Spirit, and communicates 
the Spirit and spiritual liberty to all who turn 
to Him. 

[3. The Old Testament should be studied under 
the New Testament light. Not only should we 
throw ourselves back among the persons and 
scenes there portrayed, so as to understand what 
was real and necessary for them, but as much as 
possible look on them in their relation to the 
whole future of God’s kingdom. Asa part of a 
preparatory system, directed by a Ruler who sees 
the end from the beginning, all persons and 
events have quite as much significance with refer- 
ence to something in the future, as with reference 
to the age and circumstances in which they were 


CHAP. III. 12-18. 





A Grotius therefore, who found a Christ nowhere 
in the Old Testament, fails of reaching its true 
significance, quite as much as a Cocceius, who 
found Him in everything. 

4. The Lord Jesus was as fundamentala reality 
under the Old Covenant as under the New. He 
‘‘was that Spirit” which was truly under the let- 
ter, and ‘‘the Lord” from whom the people then 
turned. The Incarnation was not the first and 
abrupt entrance of a divine Person into our hu- 
manity. Christ was not only “ the body”’ to every 
“shadow” (Col. ii. 17) but the agent in every 
event and institution of the ancient covenant. 
Every redeemed sinner of every age must owe 
not only his redemption to ‘the blood of the 
cross,”’ but his recovery and conduct unto actual 
salvation, to him as the ‘‘ Captain of the Lord’s 
host.” He is the only Mediator between God and 
man; and whatever falsehood we discover under 
the Rabbinic fables of the ‘‘ Angel Jehovah,” we 
must recognize ‘‘the Lord the Spirit”? under the 
“Jehovah” of the ancient covenant. 

5. And yet there is an essential distinction be- 
tween the Old and the New Dispensation. If we 
refuse to go with many who would totally divorce 
Christianity from Judaism, we equally shrink 
from those who look upon it simply as a devel- 
oped Judaism. Though every dispensation of the 
true religion must be built upon the same funda- 
mental principles, their outward forms may be 
radically different. The patriarchal and Mosaic 
ministrations were predominantly and charac- 
teristically legal. The latter especially, was a 
system of minute rules, and but few principles. 
Little was left to discretion or free affection. Par- 
don was shadowed forth as well as human guilt 
under the sacrifices, but these were a veil which 
concealed a mystery not to be trusted to men’s 
weakness. An esoteric reserve was in every rite 
and symbol. The New Covenant abolishes all 
this. God’s people are entrusted with the highest 
mysteries. The disciplina of Hellenism, of Rab- 
binism, and of Sacerdotalism generally, is en- 
tirely abjured. All idea of a pedagogic system, 
preparatory to something hereafter. is renounced. 
God’s people are no longer in pupilage, but in 
their full majority. Christianity is an everlast- 
ing Gospel, and the last of all conceivable dis- 
pensations of the true religion among men. See 
a Sermon of Dr. Emmons, on ‘*The Mosaic Dis- 
pensation abolished by the Christian Dispensa- 
tion.” Works, Vol. VI. Ser. 13. 

6. Congeniality of mind is indispensable to a 
perception of the truth. No one is prepared to 
study theological truth until he has ‘‘turned to 
the Lord.” When he yearns after the Lord and 
salvation, then the veil which confined the view 
to what is selfish and individual, drops off from 
the heart, and a full system of truth and an ever- 
lasting kingdom beams upon an “open face.’’ 
John vii. 17. 

7. The Jewish people are yet to be converted 
to Christ. It is a wonderful prophecy which 
the ancient Prophets and Apostles have given us, 
that amid the wreck of all ancient nations, the 
Jewish, the most unlikely to do so of them all, 
should survive; and that the heart (the collec- 
tive national heart) would turn to Christ. This 
is a separate matter from the assertion, that as 
. the “Covenant people,” they are to have special 








61 





privileges and honors among other nations in the 
kingdom of Christ. ] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Curysostom:—VeEr. 18. ‘*As soon as we are 
baptized, our souls being cleansed by the Spirit 
are illuminated so as to shine brighter than the 
sun; we not only look into the divine glory, but 
we receive a degree of lustre from it, as a piece 
of pure silver receives the rays of the sun when 
it is placed within its beams and reflects them— 
not merely because of its own nature, but be- 
cause of the sun’s luminousness. In like man- 
ner the soul which has been purified and made 
brighter than silver, receives a beam of the Spi- 
rit’s glory, and reflects it.” [THEopoRET:—As 
clear water presents an image of those who look 
upon it, of the sun itself and of the vaulted sky, 
so the pure heart is converted into a kind of 
copy and mirror of the divine glory. | 

SrarKke:—VeER. 12. Whoever would cheerfully 
speak of divine truth, must first receive Christ 
freely and joyfully to his own heart, and believe 
that salvation is freely offered to all men (1 Tim. 
ii. 4). Hepincer:—ver. 138. Israel’s blindness 
was more than common; they had much preach- 
ing and but slightimpression; Moses’ face shone 
brightly upon them, and why could they not be- 
hold him? A brutish habit, a dull intellect, in- 
veterate wickedness, and an irreconcilable anti- 
pathy to God and His Word, had formed a thick 
covering around their hearts (chap. iv. 3). Ver. 
14:—Hepincer. Israel’s blindness was nota mere 
natural effect, but a judgment of God that they 
might henceforth be ever reading but learning 
nothing. What multitudes seem in haste to hard- 
en their hearts by their abuse of hearing and 
reading! Why do they read at all, if they have 
no desire to be healed (Mark iv. 25)? If we 
would derive any profit from reading the Old 
Testament, or get rid of Moses’ covering, we 
must become acquainted with Jesus Christ and 
seek for Himthere. Then shall we perceive that 
the law was never given usto justify us, and that 
the only justification which will avail before God, 
is not in ourselves, but in Christ by faith.—Ver. 
15. It is a terrible thing to be blind, but to be 
blind with no desire to see in the midst of clear 
light, is far worse (John ix. 89; Rev. iii. 17).— 
Ver. 16. We can never have a true practical 
knowledge of God except by turning to the Lord. 
Ver. 17. To have Jesus alone, is to have the Gos- 
pel comfort and the sweetest pleasure. The surest 
refreshment is found in the way of godly sor- 
row. Glorious triumph of faith! The curse is 
abolished, Satan is vanquished, and sin is taken 
away; every cord is cut, and we are free !—Ver. 
18: A knowledge of God’s love, holiness and 
goodness as they are presented in the Gospel, is 
like a clear reflection of the sun, it produces a 
copy of those divine perfections in the soul, 
which receives the impression as naturally as the 
eye does an image from the mirror. The more 
we receive of such knowledge, the more perfectly 
are those attributes reproduced in our faith and 
life.—Hrpincer: Imprint, O Jesus, thine image 
on our souls, and make us more entirely like 
thyself! 


62 





Bertens. Bisue, Ver. 12:—A spiritual mind 
knows in whom it has believed, and the Spirit of 
the Son will lead it directly to the Father, that it 
may know and make known to others, both the 
Father and the Son. This is the perpetual well- 
spring of an ingenuous spirit.—Ver. 13. Why 
should any now be kept back by a slavish, timid 
and hesitating spirit, when they have a right to 
claim all the blessings of divine grace ?—Ver. 14. 
“They have eyes, and yet they see not.’ It is 
all the same asif they could not read. This isa 
righteous judgment upon them for shutting them- 
selves from the light, and refusing to be drawn 
by the Father. ‘‘Ye search the Scriptures, and 
ye do well; but ye will not come to me”—(John 
y. 39-40). Thus it is among many at the present 
day; indeed a double covering is now in their 
way, for it rests not only upon the Old, but upon 
the New Testament. They have never been 
anointed withthe Spirit; they willnot humbly bow 
before the Lord, and their own righteousness al- 
ways stands before them as an idolatrous pillar. 
Ver. 15. Let us by all means get out of that old 
Judaism which receives nothing but what pleases 
us—for it is under the influence of such a spirit 
that the hearts of many are hardened, and hypo- 
critically indulge in a thousand prejudices against 
the truth and its proper spirit. ‘Are we not 
Lutherans,” they exclaim, ‘‘have we not been 
baptized, etc.”” Those who resist the truth, tell us 
much of certain intellectual powers with which 
man is endowed (reason). We would not despise 
these, but we dare not appeal to them as the final 
arbitrators and sources of religious truth. And 
yet this is what has bewitched multitudes of 
our learned men.—Ver. 16. Let men cease to 
prescribe barren rules and institutions for the 
Lord, and let them turn to Him prayerfully 
and with all their hearts, and they will soon 
find that their light will brighten, a host of 
prejudices will vanish, and darkness and error 
will be cleared away—(Isa. xxv. 7). Though 


the covering may have wrapped itself com- | 


pletely around our spirits, if we will but turn 
to the light and seek wisdom from God in sin- 
cere faith, it will be torn away. (Eph. v. 14; 
Acts ix. 11, 18).—Oftentimes when an intelli- 
gent man imagines that he has attained a perma- 
nent and lively conception of sacred mysteries, 
he receives the Divine anointing, and finds that 
a number of coverings had been formed upon his 
heart; he is surprised to gain entirely new views 
of God’s word, and as the salve of God’s Spirit 
gradually extends over his mental eye, one film 
of legal and figurative forms after another falls 
off.—Ver. 17, The Lord is the Spirit who gives 
us; spir.tual life, and delivers us from all con- 
straint of external authority, all unwillingness, 
indolence and feebleness, e/c., in the performance 
of our duties. (John viii. 36). The glory of the 
Lord then sheds its beams upon an open face.— 
Whoever truly looks into the ministry and law 
of liberty, can never be out of harmony with the 
Divine will, for the Spirit directs him and sup- 
plies him with ali he needs. He can have no 
fellowship with any thing which is impure, for 
the Spirit is always directing his mind to those 
higher and better things which satisfy him. 
Such is the spiritual freedom which withdraws 
us from the slavery of sense, and not only sub- 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





jects the body to the spirit but the spirit itself 
to God’s Spirit.—The way by which we reach 
it is very likely by a painful experience of what 
a legal bondage is. Under such sorrows faith 
in Christ puts forth its power and finds deliver- 
ance in Him. Then the humbled heart knows 
how to appreciate the freedom of a pure service, 
and yields a cheerful obedience. Without making 
a sinful conscience of any thing, it will indulge 
in no sin, and will rather renounce its own free- 
dom on account of another’s weakness.—What 
before seemed a severe discipline and torment, is 
now a light which drives away all darkness. 
The soul is in the light and walks in the light.— 
Where the Lord is, He has a sanctuary in which 
He and His Spirit dwells; a glorious ministra- 
tion of the Spirit is carried on; God is wor- 
shipped in the beauty of holiness; and a new 
life, and a new freedom, and a blessedness never 
known before, is enjoyed.—Ver. 18. As sun- 
beams produce an image of the sun, so the beams 
of Divine glory produce a Divine likeness.—If 
we will but stand before the mirror of our cruci- 
fied Lord, His lovely image will so impress itself 
upon our hearts that we shall partake of His pe- 
culiar Spirit. Loving Him with all our hearts 
we must become like Him. We shall thus in 
our measure see God as we walk, and possess a 
more than ordinary enjoyment of God and of 
His glory.—And yet such a transformation must 
not be expected at once, but gradually, from one 
degree of glory and Divine blessedness to an- 
other (comp. iv. 16); and always ina way which 
makes us feel our dependence upon grace (as by 
the Spirit of the Lord). The moment we take 
our eyes from Him we shall fall back into stiff 
and legal forms.—All true Christians, in propor- 
tion to their susceptibility, must even in this life 
have a part inChrist’s glory. Obstinate sinners, 
on the other hand, will be overshadowed by the 
image of Satan, from one degree of darkness to 
another as by the Spirit of the pit. 

Rigecer, Ver. 12:—We must often think of the 
permanent results of our preaching in another 
world. (1 Thess. ii. 19). “If we make it our 
constant and all absorbing aim to please the 
Lord Jesus and to stand approved at His coming, 
we cannot but be more earnest in our work and 
more untiring in our diligence and patience. 
If I would not lose my own soul and be rejected 
as an unprofitable servant, I must be sure of 
finding some souls who have been benefited by 
my ministrations. The Lord grant it for Christ’s 
sake.’’ (Sxrrz)!—A sincere and honest preacher 
will not hesitate to speak boldly from the fulness 
of his heart whatever he thinks may be useful 
to his fellow men.—Vy,. 13-16. It is not uncom- 
mon for those to become hardened in heart (and 
this is nothing but one kind of blindness, or at 
least of unsusceptibilty) who are ignorantly fa- 
miliar with God’s Word, but are obstinately set 
upon their own way and make use of that word 
only for a pretext.—Vy. 17-18. Turning to the 
Lord is turning to Him who gives the Spirit. 
He secures to us the righteousness which the law 
demands, and enables us to serve God under a free 
dispensation of the Spirit. This is spiritual 
freedom, seeing every thing without a covering, 
and coming boldly to a throne of grace. We 
look with an uncovered face upon the glory of 


CHAP. III. 12-18. 


the Lord in the Gospel as in a mirror, and we 
convey the image which thus falls upon our 
hearts to our fellow men, that their eyes also 
may be opened, and their hearts may be won for 
Him.—The lustre of Moses’ face was liable to 
fade away and cease forever, but our glory ad- 
vances from one degree to another, until that 
shall appear which we shall be, when we see 
our Lord as He is. 

Hevusner, Ver. 15: A perusal of the Scrip- 
tures without intellectual energy or susceptible 
hearts can do no one any good. And yet even 
many nominal Christians may unhappily fancy 
that they are models of virtue; and from that 
moment the true Christ, who is our only available 
righteousness, is under a veil. The very law 
which should teach them their poverty and drive 
them to Christ and His righteousness, serves only 
to make them fancy themselves rich and able to 
get along without Christ.—Ver. 16: Believe in 
Christ, and then the soul and the whole Bible 
will be full of light.—Ver. 17: The same Christ, 
in whom the Spirit dwells, must bestow that 
Spirit upon men. There can be no Spirit with- 
out Him. He alone can free us from the fetters 
of error and delusion, and then we shall know 
what a free faith, a free will and a free enjoy- 
ment and love are. True freedom is wherever 
a man is not hampered by selfishness, 7. 6., by his 
own opinions and purposes, and when Christ has 
the supreme control of his whole being.—Ver. 
18: Hag thy soul the features of Christ: truth, 
love, meekness, fidelity (Matth. xi. 29)? The 
looking upon Christ has this power, because the 
image which the Gospel presents of Him is spiri- 
tual and quickening. The Spirit comes from 
Christ. 

W. F. Besser, Vers. 12: The evangelical min- 
ister’s joy is the dawn of an eternal day begun 
in time. [ὑ 15 the joy of our Lord, the faithful 
Witness from the bosom of the Father, showing 
us plainly of the Father (Jno. xvi. 25).—Ver. 14: 
God often gives up (Rom. ix. 18) those who are 
obstinate and disobedient to be hardened and 
blinded by the preaching of the same word whose 
softening and enlightening influence they had 
resisted. The law will be a school-master to 
bring those to Christ (Gal. iii. 24) who commit 
themselves to its discipline, and never think of 
blunting the point of its deadly letter by their 
self-righteous performances; but it will only har-. 
den those whose perverted and carnal minds 
fancy that they are righteous before God, be- 
cause they externally keep His commandments 
and go through certain forms of worship. It de- 
pends not so mueh upon the kind of Scripture 
which we read, as upon the manner in which we 
read it, whether it shall be unmeaning and sealed 
to us.—Ver. 15: Even to the present hour God 
is punishing the sins of the wicked children of 
wicked ancestors with the veil which Moses put 
upon his face. The heart’s covering is woven 
out of those delusions into which the natural 
man so often falls with respect to the merit of 
free will and the goodness of merely outward 
works.—Ver. 16: It is only “ἴα Thy light that 
we see light” (Ps. xxxvi. 10); for the glory of 











63 





Moses and the prophets has not been uncovered 
even by the appearance of the true Light Him- 
self. It is not in the light of common sense nor 
the light of philosophical schools, says Hamann, 
that we see light, but only in the light of the 
Lord who is the Spirit.—Ver. 17: The Lord is 
wherever the Spirit converts, enlightens and 
quickens the heartsofmen. Thisisin the Church 
of the New Testament, where He Himself dwells 
by His‘word and Spirit, and where He has de- 
clared that He is to be found. And yet where 
the Spirit of the Lord is, is freedom (Jno. viii. 
36; Rom. viii. 15) from every legal letter which 
kills and condemns, or obliges and compels any 
one.—Ver. 18: We look upon the Lord’s glory 
with uncovered faces: the covering upon our hearts 
has been removed, for we see ourselves, sinful and 
condemned as we are in the flesh; and then the 
covering has been removed from before the Divine 
heart, for we now see Him, our gracious God and 
merciful Father, as He is in Christ. However 
many of us there may be who with uncovered 
faces behold the glory of the Lord, we shall all 
be changed into the single image of our common 
Lord, although its manifold gleries are shed forth 
in separate features from the various members 
of His general Church; and its collected radiance, 
like the seven-fold colors of the rainbow, are 
given forth, not from any single Christian, but 
from the whole collected body of Christ. 

[Wuirsy has given us six particulars in which 
the Apostle presents the superiority of the Gospel 
to the law (in substance) as follows: “1. Sinai’s 
glory only made the people afraid, the Gospel’s 
gives confidence and joy; 2. Moses gave only 
a letter which killed, the Gospel gives spirit and 
life; 3. Moses’ glory diminished and finally van- 
ished forever, but the glory of the Gospel in- 
creases and has no end; 4. The law sought re- 
serves under many shadows and ceremonies, the 
Gospel has but few fixed forms and seeks only a 
complete display of its truths and spirit; 5. The 
law could not remove the veil from men’s hearts, 
the Gospel gives us ail open faces; 6. Israel 
looked only upon Moses’ radiance, Christians 
look directly upon a glorified God-Man, whose 
lustres transform them into His own likeness. 
Stanley’s beautiful summary of the Apostle’s 
imagery in this chapter, though slightly affected 
by his peculiar interpretation of ver. 16, is yet 
worth transcribing (much abridged). We have: 
1. The commendatory epistle, written on the 
Apostle’s heart; and, 2. the same written on the 
hearts of the Corinthians. 38. The contrast be- 
tween this Epistle of the Spirit on the heart, and 
the lifeless engraving upon the Sinaitic stones. 
4. The grand figure of Moses with his face irra- 
diated by Divine glories. 5. The same, but 
veiled, to hide its fading splendors, and sur- 
rounded by a multitude of veiled figures with 
eyes turned upon him. 6. The same, but un- 
veiled, and entering the Divine presence with 
more than rekindled radiance; and 7. The:same 
figure multiplied in the Apostle and his brethren, 
with unveiled faces turned toward Christ, whose 
light transfigures them into glorious images of 
Himself.” } 


64 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





VIIIL.—GLORY OF THE APOSTOLIC MINISTRY, WHOSE DUTIES WERE OPENLY AND 
HONESTLY PERFORMED, NOTWITHSTANDING THE INJURIOUS INFLUENCE OF ITS 
ENEMIES. 


Cuarter LY. 1-6. 


1 Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not*'; 
2 But [we] have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty [shame, τῆς αἰσχύνης, nos 
walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully [falsifying (dodvdyte¢) 
the word of «God]; but by manifestation of the truth, commending? ourselves to every 
man’s conscience [conscience of men] in the sight of God. But if [and even if] our 
Gospel be hid [veiled, zexadvypgvov], it is hid [veiled] to them that are lost [perishing]: 
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest 
the light of the glorious Gospel [gospel of the glory] of Christ, who is the image of 
God, should shine’ unto them [should shine forth]. For we preach not ourselves, but 
Christ Jesus [as] the Lord; and ourselves your scrvants for Jesus’ sake. For [that 
same] God, who commanded the light to shine* out of darkness, [said out of dark- 
ness light should shine] hath shined in our hearts, to give the light [in order to the 
shining forth, πρὸς φωτισμὸν] of the knowledge of the glory of God* in the face of 
Jesus [om. Jesus ]® Christ. 


Ooo me ὠὦϑ 


1 Ver. 1.—The Recep. has ἐκκακοῦμεν, but Lachmann and Tischendorf have ἐγκακοῦμεν. Meyer thinks the latter an 
emendation to make the text accord with general usage among all Greek writers, with the exception of some doubtful 
passages of the New Testament, and some writings of the Fathers. [A similar, though not quite the same variety of read- 
ings is found for the same word in Luke xviii. 1; Gal. vi.9; Eph. iii. 13; and 2 Thess. iii. 13. Meyer thinks that ἐκκακ. was 
probably more used in oral speech in Paul’s time, though it appears in no Greek writer before him: and that Paul and Luke 
introduced it into ecclesiastical usage, where it sometimes occurs, but still less frequently than ἐγκακ. The Codd. A. B.D 
(1st Cor.) F. G. (the three last have it written évcax). Sinait. and some cursives favor ἐγκακ. but C. Ὁ. (8d Cor.) E. K. L. et 
al. with Chrys., Theodt., Damasc., ct al. have ἐκκακ. Among the versions some of the old Ital. have non defectmus, and 
others with Tertul. and the Vulg. have non dejicimus, still others with one copy of the Vulg. and Ambrosizst, have non 
deficiamus; August. has non infirmemur, the Gothic non fiamus segnes, the Syriac non est nobis tedium, Erasmus non degen- 
eramus. Wycliffe and the Rhemish have we fail not; Tyndale and Geneva with our A. V. and Bib. Union, we jaint not ; 
and Cranmer, we go not out of kynde. The difference of meaning between the two readings is uot very serious; for which 
see Exeg. notes} 

(2 Ver. 2—The Rec. has συνιστῶντες with D. (3d Cor.), E. K. L. Chrys., Theodt., e¢ al., A. and B. seem uncertain 
whether the reading should be -ῶντες or -dvovres, but C. Ὁ. (1st Cor.) F. G. and Sinait. and three cursives, have συνιστάντες, 
which is edited by Lachm., Tisch. and Alford. (omp. chap. vi. 5; and x. 18]. 

3 Ver. 4.--Διαυγάσαι and καταυγάσαι are both glosses to define more precisely the simple verb. [The principal autho- 
rity for the former is A., four cursives, and some copies of some Greek fathers of the Antiochian school: and for the latter, 
C.D. et al. The Recep. αὐγάσαι is sustained by B. F. K. L. Sinait. and the best MSS. of the Greek Fathers]. The Recep. 
has αὐτοῖς after αὐγάσαι, but withont much MSS. authority. It is evidently an interpolation. 

4 Ver. 6—Lachmann has λάμψει instead of λάμψαι, on the authority of A. B.[D. (1st Cor.) Sinait (Ist Cor.) et al.) It is 
probably a suggestion from Gen. i, 3. [Bloomfield, Meyer, Wordsworth, Tischendorf, agree with the Recep. and most of the 
versions and fathers in preferring λάμψαι, but Alford and Stanley agree with Kling in thinking this a quotation of the 
creative fiat. Some respectable MSS. omit os]. 

6 Ver. 6.—Lachmann has αὐτοῦ in place of τοῦ θεοῦ. but the MSS. evidence for it is not satisfactory, and the internal 
evidence is against it, since no one could have been uncertain of the antecedent of αὐτοῦ, [aud hence would have had ne 
eat to put τοῦ θεοῦ in its place for an explanation. Its only uncial authorities are F, G. and the Ist Corr. of 

.and Ὁ]. 

6 νον θ.-- σοῦ before Χριστοῦ is not genuine. [And yet it is inserted before χριστοῦ by C. K. L. and Sinait., and after 
Meal D. E. F. G., the Italic and Vulgate versions, and the Latin Fathers; A. B. and some Greek writers have only 
χριστοῦ]. 


insincerity which had occasioned the digression 
in chap. iii. 1-18, still lingers in his recollection, 


BX EGERIOAD ANP Cee and accordingly he turns round upon it, as if to 


Ver. 1,2. [Paul ‘‘now resumes the thread of 
the general argument, which he had twice before 
taken up (chap. iii. 4 and 12); but with the 
‘difference that from the confidence which he 
possesses in the greatness of his task, he now 
draws new conclusion; not ‘we use great 
plainness of speech,’ as in chap. iii. 12, but ‘we 
faint not;’ a conclusion which, as it is more 
directly an answer to the original question, ‘ who 
is sufficient for these things?’ in chap, ii. 16, so 
is it the basis of the ensuing chapters iv 7; v. 
10. But with one of the inversions peculiar to 
this Epistle, he has hardly entered on this new 
topic before he drops it again. The charge of 


give it one parting blow before he finally dis- 
misses it from his mind. Hence chap. iv. 2-6 
are still closely connected with iii. 1-18, while 
the new subject begun in this first verse is not 
resumed till verse 7, where it is expanded in 
all its parts, so that the true apodosis or close of 
the sentence commenced here does not occur till 
verse 16, where the same words are repeated; 
Jor this cause we faint not.”’ StantEy]. Return- 
ing from his digression respecting the harden- 
ing of the Jews, he now resumes his account 
(chap. iii. 12, 15) of that course of action which 
he was now pursuing, and which he thought suit- 
able to the glory of the evangelical ministry (and 





: 
| 


CHAP. IV. 1-6. 65 


—————__ ΄ΠΠ-πΠΠπτπΠΓτ-το-.-Ὺο:οτς5Ά.:ρχρ͵-ΠὯτ τ --““““ἴἥ“θΠ --Ὦῦ-͵.-’---------- 


to the Apostolic office).—Therefore having, 
through the mercy of God, received this 
ministration, we faint not.—What he means 
by διὰ τοῦτο is more distinctly expressed in what 
follows: having received this ministration. This 
ministration (διακονία) he had spoken of as a 
ministration of the Spirit (chap. ili. 8), of righ- 
teousness (ver. 9), that which remaineth (ver. 11), 
and that which produced the results described 
in chap. iii. 18. Διὰ τοῦτο therefore finds its 
original reference as far back as chap. iii. 7. 
The boasting (καύχησις) which seems implied in 
this, is reduced immediately to a glorying in the 
Lord, and made to involve an actual humiliation 
of himself, when he adds the words, as we have 
received mercy; implying that he had been per- 
sonally uaworthy of such a ministry, and owed 
it entirely to Divine grace that he had been 
called ant ordainel to it (comp. 1 Cor. vii. 25; 
xv. 9, 10; 1 Tim. i. 12-16; Gal. i. 15, 16). The 
course of conduct which he had suggested in 
chap. ili. 12, and which was suitable to a min- 
istry thus graciously bestowed upon him, he 
describes first negatively: οὐκ ἐκκακοῦμεν, we are 
not faint-hearted or cowardly. The reading 
ἐγκακοῦμεν would have substantially the same 
significance. [The former word can hardly have 
in this place a strictly moral signification (κακός, 
bad, wicked) as Riickert .contends it should 
have, contrary to its usage and the connection; 
but it seems to signify here that the conscious- 
ness of such a high calling would not allow him 
to turn out bad, to prove recreant, or to act in- 
consistent with it (Luke xviii. 1; Gal. vi. 9). 
Osiander notices that the word has two distinct 
meanings: the one to slacken or flag, and the 
other to be discouraged or dispirited. The 
former agrees very well with the explanation in 
the next clause; but perhaps the latter agrees 
equally well, since the discouragement is evi- 
dently one which springs from an anxiety about 
difficulties and opponents, and so leads to deceit 
and an adulteration of the word of truth. 
etymology of the word also confirms this mean- 
ing, since the word κακός signifies bad not oaly 
in a moral sense, but especially with respect to 
war. Accordingly the Greek expositors and the 
more modern strict philologists (Billroth, Meyer, 
de Wette), embrace both meanings in the ren- 
dering: segnescere, to become slow and dull. 
The connection with the subsequent negative may 
be regarded as a litotes in which he modestly 
expresses a high degree of courage by denying 
the contrary. Thus Theodoret (and Chrysostom, 
see below): Οὗ δὴ χάριν, φησὶ ; φέρομεν γεννάιως τὰ 
προσπίπτοντα λυπηρά. ““Οπ which account, he 
says, we endure what befalls us with a noble spi- 
rit.” ᾿Ἐγκακοῦμεν signifies the opposite of παῤ- 
ῥησιάζω, 7. ὁ. to shrink from plainness of speech 
or action (Alford), to behave in a cowardly 
manner]. The positive contrast to what is here 
claimed, is not dulness or indolence in the per- 
formance of his duties (and above all, Riickert’s 
interpretation, which makes it involve something 
generally and morally base, is entirely inadmis- 
sible, or at least not proven), but from what we 
find is repelled in ver. 2, we are led to believe 
that it is discouragement or faint-heartedness 
under difficulties. Curysostom: We are so far 
from being without heart, that we are rather full 





The | 








of joy, and bold in speaking and in labors].— 
But we have renounced the secret things 
of shame (ver. 2).—These secret or hidden 
things of shame {τὰ κρυπτὰ τῆς αἰσχύνης) were 
either, in accordance with the original meaning 
of αἰσχύνη, a feeling of shame, or that sense of 
honor which hides its own shame, and will not 
let that come to the light which may cause dis- 
honor (Meyer after Chrysostom); or better and 
more in accordance with predominant usage in 
the New Testament (Phil. iii. 19; Heb. xii. 2; 
Jude ver. 19; Rev. iit. 18; Luke xiv. 9), a dis- 
honor, the concealment of a disgrace, 7. 6. of a 
dishonor done; or, still better (inasmuch as the 
emphasis lies upon τὰ κρυπτὰ) disgraceful secrets, 
hidden things which would produce or bring 
dishonor if they were known (comp. Rom. i. 26). 

There is no need of supposing that the Apostle 
had his eye directly as yet upon particular acts, 
such as plots, intrigues, suppressions or perver- 
sions of the truth, or even obscenas voluptates ; 
but he probably alludes simply to those general 
matters which are mentioned in the participial 
sentence, those secret things which would infal- 
libly cause shame if they were brought to the 
light. Neanper: ‘those disgraceful and secret 
arts of carnal wisdom which had been falsely at- 
tributed to him.” ᾿Απειπάμεϑα is an ἅπαξ λεγό- 
μενον so far as it relates to the New Testament. 
[On the reflexive force of the middle voice, im- 
plying that ‘the act belonged to the inner men- 
tal world .of the agent rather than the actual 
world without.” See Jelf’s Gram. ᾧ 808, 6; and 
Winer, /d. ἢ 39, 8, and on the aorist, ‘as deno- 
ting what is done at all times alike, and is 
habitual,” see Bloomfield]. The word by no 
means implies that he had acted in this manner 
at an earlier period of his life, but it simply 
means that he declined or refused such things 
(ἑποῤῥίπτεσϑαι, mapareicta).—Not walking 
in craftiness, nor adulterating the word 
of God.—(Comp. chap. i. 2; x. 2). He refers 
here, to his own official ccurse, but he unques- 


| tionably alludes very signiticantly to a very dif- 


ferent kind of conduct in kis more sordid oppo- 
nents. Πανουργία, here rendered craftiness 
[from πᾶς and épyw] (1 Cor. iii. 19), signifies 
adroitness, dexterity; put it is used generally in 
a bad sense to signify a cunning craftiness, a 
shrewd use of those intrigues and schemes by 
which a man makes a way for himself and ac- 
quires and maintains influence [‘‘a πανοῦργος is 
one who can do every thing and is willing to do 
any thing to accomplish his ends.” Hovae]. 
A second point in which his conduct differed from 
that of his opponents, was, that he did not adul- 
terate the word of God (μηδὲ δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον 
τοῦ ϑεοῦ), a kind of dealing essentially the same 
as the καπηλεύειν repudiated in chap. ii. 17. 
Men were in the habit of saying: a man adul 
terates his wine (δολοῦν τὸν οἶνον). In contrast 
with such deceit, he says of himself and his com- 
panions:—but by manifestation of the 
truth commending ourselves to every 
man’s conscience.—The truth here spoken of 
is the word of God, the Gospel in its unadulter- 
ated purity; and the way in which he had 
preached it was the reverse of such adulterations 
of the word of God. Συνιστάναι ἑαυτόν signi- 
fies to gain confidence and esteem in this regular 


66 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO ΤΠῈ CORINTHIANS, 





way, as opposed to the self-commendation im- 
puted to him by his opponents (chap. iii. 1). The 
way he pursued was directed to every man’s 
conscience (πρὸς πᾶσαν συνείδησιν ἀνϑρώπων ; 
comp. Rom. ii. 9: ἐπὶ πᾶσην ψυχὴν ἀνθρώπου). In 
this way of interpretation, συνείδησις becomes 
more prominent. The word is used to signify 
that mental power which makes us conscious of, 
and certifies to us those thoughts and emotions 
which pass through our minds, shows us what is 
truth and duty, and enforces its assertions and 
claims only on the ground that every thing it ap- 
proves must be true and right, and that our spi- 
rit and motives.must be conformed to our concep- 
tions of truth and duty (Beck, Bibl. Seelenl., p. 75; 
comp, 73 and 77). The Apostle intended to say, 
therefore, that the way in which he preached 
was such that every man’s conscience approved 
of him, and hence that all who attended to the 
verdicts of conscience, and were not led by cor- 
rupt inclinations to reject such decisions, would 
be obliged to confess that his conduct sprung 
from a true and honest heart. Such an explana- 
tion seems to us more conformed to the context 
than that of Osiander, who defines the συνείδησις 
here to be the ‘‘essentiai organ for the recogni- 
tion of truth, and which must assent to the Gos- 
pel as the truth and power of God, because it 
corresponds to man’s necessities and is effectual 
to awaken and tranquilize his moral nature.” The 
phrase: in the sight of God (ἐνώπιον τοῦ ϑεοῦ, 
comp. chap. ii. 17; vii. 12) is not a solemn oath, 
but simply implies that the assertion he had 
made respecting his commendation of himself 
to every man’s conscience, was eminently pure, 
inasmuch as he made it under a full sense of 
God’s presence to hear him. Neanper: ‘There 
is indeed a moral intelligence in every man to 
which we may appeal as to the impression he re- 
ceives from us; and yet as every thing human is 
fallacious, Paul made his final appeal to God 
himself as the infallible witness of his upright 
motives and his honest deportment.” [It was 
not the truth directly which the Apostle says he 
and his associates commended to the cvveid. but 
ἑαυτοὺς, themselves, their whole persons, conduct 
and preaching and this by means of the ἀληϑεία 
which they preached. By recognizing the truth 
and the honesty of the preaching, men were 
obliged to commend them. vvéid. then is more 
than ‘‘ consciousness,” for it recognized the mo- 
rality and truth of things not only in ourselves, 
but in others. (See note on chap. i. 12). The 
only condition of the recognition was that truth 
and its relations should be correctly apprehended, 
i. e., that each case should be truly presented at 
the bar of conscience. (See Serm. of Chalmers 
and J. Howe on this passage). Πᾶσαν ovvéud. 
ἀνϑ. is every conscience of man, the universal, 
or the public conscience. CHrRyYsostom: ‘not 
only to believers, but to unbelievers, are we 
manifested, since we are presented before all, 
that every thing belonging to us may be seruti- 
nized according to their pleasure.” Nor was it 
merely ‘‘ to every good conscience (Grotius), for 
the Apostle expressly implies that it was even to 
them that are lost 7. 

Vers. 3-6. The Apostle now meets (ver. 3) the 
objection, that what he had just said would 
hardly harmonize with the fact that his preach- 











ing was not successful with a large portion of his 
hearers, and was not recognized and received by 
some as the truth. He does not deny this, and 
he now recurs to the figure of the covering (chap, 
iii. 14).—But if our Gospel be veiled, it is 
veiled to them that are perishing (ver. 3). 
—He concedes no contradiction in this to what 
he was saying, since those who failed of receiy- 
ing him were among those who were perishing 
on account of their blindness by Satan. There 
was no defect in the requisite clearness of his 
preaching, but only in the mental perceptions of 
his hearers (ver. 3,4). The fact objected against 
him is made emphatic by putting ἔστιν at the 
very head of the major proposition (the protasis). 
‘‘Our Gospel” has here the same signification 
as the manifestation of the truth (ver. 2). The 
word ἡμῶν tells us who were engaged in pro- 
claiming the Gospel, as in Rom. ii. 16; xvi. 25; 
1 Thess, i.5; 2 Thess, ii. 14; and it is equivalent 
to the Gospel which I preached (ὃ εὐηγγελισάμην) 
m 1 Cor. xv. 1 (comp. Gal. i. 11). In the con- 
clusion the emphasis should rest upon ἐν τοῖς 
ἀπολλυμένοις (among them who are perishing), 
and hence these words are placed at the begin- 
ning. Comp. chap. ii. 25; 1 Cor. i. 18. [᾿Ἀπολ- 
λυμένοις does not necessarily mean the finally lost, 


those who deserve to be lost (Grotius), but those © 


who are perishing (Alford), those who were then 
lost. In Matth. x.6; xv. 24; xviii. 11; and Luke 
xv. 4, 6, 24, 32, the lost were such as were at 
that time lost to the Church, to God and to good- 
ness, but might afterwards in some cases be re- 
covered. Henry: ‘The hiding of the Gospel 
was both an evidence and a cause of their ruin, 
and if the Gospel did not find and save them, 
they were lost forever]. Ἔν is equivalent neither 
to the dative, nor to in respect to, but to, with, 
coram; since the persons spoken of did not recog- 
nize the Gospel on account of inward darkness, 
a covering on their own hearts, it has the force 
of in; or, since the ἀπολλυμένοι expresses the 
sphere or the department within which the Gos- 
pel is veiled or not recognized, of, among (inéer). 
Indeed, all these significations come to the same 
general result. The fact alluded to is still fur- 
ther developed when he goes back (ver. 4) to its 
original cause.—Among whom the god of 
this world hath blinded the minds of 
the unbelieving (ver. 4),—i. e., the blinding 
of the mental perceptions (vofuara) and the au- 
thor of the blindness, the god of this world (ϑεὸς 
τοῦ αἰώνος τούτου). The blinding of the νοήματα 
implies that the mental perceptions of these per- 
sons had been impaired and so blinded that 
their understandings were deluded with sophis- 
tries until all original inclination to truth was 
gone (comp. Matth. vi. 22), and their minds (νοῦς) 
had no correct intellectual views (Beck, p. 53, 54). 
Ta νοήματα (comp. chap. iii. 14) may here very 
appropriately be translated, ‘‘the perceptive 
powers, the understanding.” The blinding ig 
the work of the god of this world (ὁ θεὸς τοῦ 
αἰῶνος τοῦτου), by which phrase is meant not the 
spirit of the age, or anything of that kind, but 
Satan (as in chap. ii. 11), the prince of this 
world (Jno. xii. 81; xiv. 80). Similar expres- 
sions occur in Eph. ii. 2; vi. 12. NeanpER: 
‘Tt was with a direct purpose that Paul gives 
Satan this appellation, for he intended to imply 


CHAP. IV. 1-6. 


ππΠᾷσ ee  Ὸ -- -------- -----ο--ς----ῦ-.--ς--------------ο-οο--.--ςςο-ο----ὁ 


67 





that the selfish principle, here represented by ] Apostle writes: among these lost ones, Satan hath 


Satan, was to such men all that God should have 
been.’”’ The word ϑεός in other places signifies 
the principle which absolutely determines things 
(comp. Phil. iii. 19). Benann: Grandis et hor- 
ribilis descriptio Satane, grandi ejus, at horribili 
operi respondens. Quis alias putaret, illum posse in 
hominibus tantae luci officere? [Augustine tells 
us that nearly all ancient commentators were 
of the opinion that the word ϑεός was too 
exalted to be applied to any created being, 
and hence, that it must here have meant the 
Supreme Jehovah. Curysostom, in opposition 
to Marcion and Manichees, says: ‘We assert 
of this passage that this is spoken neither of 
the devil nor of another creator (in distinction 
from the just and good), but of the God of 
the universe, and that it is to be read thus: 
God hath blinded the minds of the unbelievers of 
this world; for the world to come hath no un- 
believers, but the present only. He blinds them, 
not by working unto this end (away with the 
thought)! but by suffering and allowing it.” As 
the Arians argued from this passage that a cre- 
ated being might be called God, even Augustine 
and others would not concede to them the natural 
construction of our passage; on which Calvin re- 
marks: ‘‘we see how far the spirit of contro- 
versy can lead men in perverting Scripture.” 
Among moderns, Dr. Adam Clarke was of a simi- 
lar opinion, and he refers to 1 Tim. i. 17, as a 
similar phrase, reminding us also that αἰῶν does 
not necessarily mean a wicked age or generation 
(Matt. xii. 32; Luke xx, 84). Even on the com- 
mon rendering, however, it is not implied that 
God had surrendered to Satan the rightful or 
actual sovereignty of any one age, but only that 
men have yielded him such a sovereignty. Arch- 
bishop Trench (Synn. 2d ser. p. 40) regrets that 
the difference between αἰών and κόσμος has not 
been preserved in the English version. He as- 
signs to the former in all cases a reference to 
time, but in a secondary and ethical sense; he 
thinks it embraces all which exists in the world 
under the conditions of time, the course and cur- 
rent of this world’s affairs, often with an evil sig- 
nificance (Eph. ii. 2). It includes all that floating 
mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, 
hopes, impulses, aims, at any time current in the 
world, which it is impossible to seize and accu- 
rately to define, but which constitute a most real 
and effective power, being the moral or immoral 
atmosphere which at every moment of our lives 
we inhale, again inevitably to exhale; what we 
often speak of as ‘“‘the times,” attaching to the 
word an ethical signification; or still more to the 
point, ‘‘the age,” the spirit or genius of the 
age].”” Comp. further upon this τοῦ αἰώνος τούτου 
what is said on 1 Cor. i. 20; ii. 6. The sphere 
in which this alienation from God takes place is 
one which originally was completely dependent 
(ethically) upon this power. But the expression 
has a peculiar sharpness in application to the 
Jews who thought they knew and appropriated 
to themselves the true God in some gpecial sense, 
but who were here in their unbelief consigned 
with the heathen to this mock deity (the simia 
Dei of Tertullian), as if they belonged to his 
special department (comp. Jno. viil. 44). Instead 
of ὧν τὰ νοήματα ἐτύφλωσεν (in whose minds) the 











blinded the minds of them that believe not (ἐν dug 
ἐτύφλωσε τὰ νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων). By them that 
believe not, we are not to understand those whose 
unbelief was the direct consequence of the blinding, 
asif the expression were εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἀπίστους. 
According to the analogy of other places, the 
word in this case would have been ἄπιστα (comp. 
1 Thess. iii. 13; Phil. iii. 2). We may remark also 
that such an idea does not accord with that which 
follows εἰς τὸ μὴ avy. etc.). Nor is it precisely a 
designation of the cause of this blinding, as if the 
expression had been διὰ τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἀπίστους. 
Τῶν ἀπίστων implies a self-determination toward 
falsehood, and a turning away from the truth, 
the reason of which must be traced finally to a 
perverted will. In these words is brought for- 
ward another aspect of the case, viz., that in 
this blinding process Satan was not alone active 
and guilty, but that the subjects of it codperated 
with him, and were guilty during the process 
and before it. (comp. Jno. iii. 18; 2 Thess. 11. 
10). [Dr. Hodge, while conceding that the doc- 
trine is Scriptural, that unbelief provokes judi- 
cial blindness, contends that the connection here 
demands a different interpretation, inasmuch as 
Paul accounts for the hiding of the Gospel to 
them that are lost, by saying that Satan had 
blinded their minds. The blindness, therefore, 
precedes the unbelief, and is the cause of it]. 
The ἐν οἷς is perhaps equivalent to ὅτε ἐν τούτοις 
(for, because, eéc.), and indicates either the ob- 
ject of the blinding, the persons who could be 
blinded (Satan’s great work, the blinding of the 
vou. of unbelievers has to be carried on in the 
hearts of the lost, for such a work cannot be per- 
formed in the hearts of the saved ones, with re- 
spect to whom the Gospel is not veiled, Meyer) ; 
or, is equivalent to among whom, and so points 
out the sphere or department in which Satan 
thus acts. The meaning, however, would be es- 
sentially the same on both interpretations. 
There is no carelessness or tautology in this lan- 
guage. Paul means to give special prominence 
to the idea that Satan carries on such a work 
among those who are in ἀπώλεια (perdition). 
The clause might be translated: in the depart- 
ment of lost souls, where the understandings of 
unbelievers are blinded by the god of this world. 
—In order that the shining light of the 
Gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the 
image of God, might not shine forth. (ver. 
4b.). Here we areinformed what Satan’s design 
is in all this; but inasmuch as what he accom- 
plished was the infliction of a Divine judgment 
(Jno. xii. 40; 2 Thess. ii. 11, 12), it may also be 
looked upon as an announcement of God’s pur- 
pose. According to the reading of the Ree. 
αὐγάσαι αὐτοῖς must be rendered: might not irra- 
diate or shine upon them, εἰσ. But αὐτοῖς is 
very feebly authenticated, and betrays evidence 
that it is only a gloss. In like manner the com- 
pound verbs διαυγάσαι and καταυγάσαι seem at first 
more appropriate: (to shine through, to beam 
upon), inasmuch as the simple verb appears 
never to have been used intransitively among 
the Greek authors. Others, therefore, take the 
simple form as equivalent to, ἕο see (properly: 
to beam upon something with the eyes, to cast 
the light of the eyes upon an object, sometimes 


68 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


———SS SS “-“«---ἰπν-  ασνο σσσ 


with an accusative and sometimes with πρὸς τι). 
But as we never meet with it in this sense ex- 
cept among the poets, the intransitive meaning 
(which is favored by the attempt to make it out 
by the insertion of the compound forms) is to be 
preferred, especially as it then gives a more sui- 
table predicate to τὸν φωτίσμόν. The αὐτοῖς, 
which we are sorry to be obliged to throw out, 
is nevertheless implied by the context. In the 
later Greek, and frequeutly in the Septuagint, 
φωτισμός has the sense of: the imparting of light, 
an enlightening, light (a translation of "\}pg in 
Ps. xxvii. 1; Job. iii. et al.), 7. 6., light when 
in movement and in communication. (Osiander). 
The words τῆς δόξης do not here express merely 
a quality of the Gospel itself (the glorious Gos- 
pel), but rather an attribute of Christ, and 
hence the object or substance of the Gospel 
(χριστοῦ). The glory of Christ is the same as 
the glory of God in the face of Christ (ver. 6), 
and the glory of the Lord (chap. iii. 18). We 
are to understand it not exclusively of Christ in 
his glorified state, for the glory of the only Be- 
gotten Son of God is exhibited during his whole 
manifestation of Himself among men, full of grace 
and truth (Jno. i. 14); and it was shed forth 
eyen in [His earthly life, and especially in His 
death on the cross, which is set forth as the very 
essence of the Gospel (1 Cor. i. 18). Hence 
Christ in His glory signifies what the Gospel sets 
forth as the entire revelation of God through 
Him in His various conditions. The whole sal- 
vation revealed in the Gospel depended on this 
state of humiliation, including His obedience 
unto death, and His subsequent exaltation (Phil. 
ii. 6-11; Rom. v.10; iv. 25; viii. 34; Luke 
xxiv. 26). Comp. Meyer, Osiander. This Christ, 
whose glory is revealed in the Gospel, is yet 
further said to be the image of God. On εἰκών 
comp. 1 Cor. xi. 7. [‘*The article is idiomati- 
cally omitted after ἔστιν. Exuicotr]. The same 
expression is used respecting Christ in Col. i. 
15 (from which some manuscripts have bor- 
rowed the adjective ἀοράτου), and Heb. i. 8.5 
We are not necessarily required by what is said 
in Phil. ii. 6; iii. 21; and Jno. xvii. 5, to refer 
this with Meyer exclusively to Christ in His ex- 
altation for the glory of God beamed from Him 
even during His earthly life (Jno. ii. 11; xiv. 9). 
Although Christ in His exalted state is more per- 
fectly the image of God, yet this expression 
must be looked upon as a particular representa- 
tion of Christ in every condition. To justify the 
Apostle’s language in calling his Gospel (ver. 3, 
τὸ evayy. ἡμῶν) proclamation of the Divine 
glory, and to show how inappropriate were the 
insinuations referred to in chap. iii. 1, he now 
proceeds to say (ver. 5):—For we preach not 
ourselves but Christ Jesus the Lord.— 
From the context, we conclude that κυρίους ought 
to be understood after ἑαυτοὺς κηρύσσομεν, 1, e., 
we do not preach ourselves as your lords (in 











[Ὁ In Col. i. 15, and Heb. i.3, the reference is to the Adyos, 
and hence ἀοράτου was appropriate. The word in the latter 
passage (χαράκτηρ) is different, but the idea is nearly the 
same. Animage is more than a likeness (ὁμοίωσις, Trench, 
Synn. Ist Ser. p. 77): things may be alike, but not images of 
one another. Animage must havea prototype after which it 
was drawn, and which it must more than resemble. Greg. 
Naz.: αὔτη yap εἰκόνος φύσις, μίμημα εἶναι τοῦ ἀρχετύπου. 
The present ἔστιν signifies that the thing spoken of was al- 
ways present]. 





contrast with δούλους ὑμῶν, your servants). Had 
hein his preaching set forth himself as a lord 
(κύριον), and made his authority, his power, and 
his lordship over them (chap. i. 24, comp. xi. 
20) his main object, instead of commending 
Christ in his glory as the only Lord over them, 
he would have adulterated God’s Word (ver. 2; 
chap. ii. 17). If we prefer not to supply κύριους, 
we may explain the sentence with Osiander thus: 
“ΤῊ substance of our preaching is not our own 
light, or wisdom, or merits, and hence we do not 
commend ourselves, nor seek our own interests.” 
Both explanations come to the same thing in the 
end. Κύριον is here used in the sense of Lord, 
because in consequence of Christ's redemption 
the Church belongs exclusively to Him (comp. 
Acts xx. 28). The positive side in relation to 
ἑαυτούς (ourselves) is expressed in the phrase— 
and ourselves your servants (δοίλους ὑμῶν) 
for Jesus’ sake—where there is an allusion to 
avery different position which some opposing 
teachers had arrogated to themselves (chap. xi. 
20). He thus gives expression to the deep hu- 
mility which he felt, and shows how entire was 
the surrender he had made of himself to his 
work; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 19. The phrase διὰ 
Ἰησοῦν (through Jesus) gives us the reason he 
was willing to sustain this servile relation to 
them; it was because the love of Christ con- 
strained him to be their servant. It is possible 
that he meant thus to say that it was by the au- 
thority of Jesus that he had been invested with 
this official dignity (by, on account of); or we 
may even regard the expression as equivalent to 
beneficio Jesu (this blessing was due to Jesus). 
The first of these meanings suits our connection 
the best, and according to it the sense would be: 
that the Apostle gave himself to be their servant, 
for Jesus’ sake, and to retain possession of the 
property he had already won for the Lord, or to 
bring them to a better acquaintance and more 
intimate fellowship with Jesus. The reason as- 
signed in ver. 6 seems to point to this last inter- 
pretation, for it is there implied that this was the 
Divine purpose regarding him when he was first 
enlightened:—Because God who called 
forth the light to shine out of darkness— 
(ver. 6). It seems quite needless and arbitrary 
to make this refer back to ver. 4, and regard 
ver. ὃ as a parenthesis. But perhaps we may 
more completely bring in the contents of ver. 5 
in another way. The reason that we preach 
Christ as our only Lord, and are willing to be 
your servants for Jesus’ sake, is, that God has en- 
lightened us:—hath shined in our hearts 
for thé shining forth of the knowledge of 
the glory of God in the face of Christ.— 
[Our explanation of this verse will depend on 
the answer we give to the question, for what 
purpose the Apostle introduced it. If his object 
was to assign the reason for his being the servant 
of the Corinthians (ver. 5, δ), then he intended 
to say here that God, who commanded, ete., had 
shined into his heart that he might diffuse it to 
others. But if his object was to give his reason 
for preaching Christ (ver. 5 a), it was because 
(ὅτι) God, who commanded, etc., had shined in 
men’s hearts (as our version has it) to give us the 
light, etc. On either interpretation the sense is 
good. The first accords with Gal. i. 16, and ig 


CHAP. IV. 1-6. 
oO .”20000— ee .ἤ η»τ«ὕ.5ὕ...-.---------- 


generally adopted. But surely the main idea of 
the passage is that Paul preached Christ, and the 
mention of his being a servant to the Corinthians 
was only incidental; the phrase ‘‘our hearts” 
(plural) can hardly mean here merely Paul’s own 
heart; and φωτισμός τῆς γνώσεως seems naturally 
to mean the objective light which came from 
Christ and would be obstructed by blindness. 
(Comp. Hodge and Billroth)]. There are also 
considerable difficulties in the grammatical struc- 
ture of the sentence, especially on account of the 
ὃς before ἔλαμψεν. This is probably the reason 
that this relative has been left out in a number 
of manuscripts, though for external as well as in- 
ternal reasons, it must be regarded as unques- 
tionably genuine. The easiest way would seem 
to be to supply éorwv before ὁ εἰπών: g. d. it is God 
who commanded, etc., who shined, ete. And yetin 
this way, that which was designed to be merely a 
type of something higher becomes the principal 
object of the statement. Certainly the phrase: 
who commanded the light to shine out of dark- 
ness, should be looked upon as describing neither 
ἃ mental illumination nor a breaking forth of the 
light of the Gospel from the obscurity of the law, 
but what took place in the first act of creation 
(Gen. i. 8); and even then it must be taken in 
such a way that ἐκ will express not a special, 
but a causal relation.—The idea then expressed 
would be that he who was the Creator of physi- 
cal light, and caused it to break forth out of 
darkness, is the same Being who has caused a 
light of a higher nature to rise in the heart of 
the Apostle. Or, if we take ἔλαμψεν, like λάμψαι 
in a preceding passage, and every where else in 
the New Testament, intransitively (for the tran- 
sitive use of the word is confined to the poets, and 
even among them is infrequent), the idea will 
be: He hath shined into our hearts (dwellingin us 
by His Spirit; comp. 1 Cor. iii. 16; xiv. 25; Jno. 
xiv. 23). There will then be no need either of 
an αὐτός or of an ὅς, and the preceding ὁ εἰπὼν- 
λάμψαι, which gives a transitive sense, will not 
stand in the way. That we may gain this sense, 


we must either supply an ἔστιν or an οὗτος ἔστιν 


before ὅς ἔλαμψεν: the God who commanded, e/c., 
is the one who has shined, ες. (de Wette); or 
the ὅς ἔλαμψεν, ete., must be taken from this and 
repeated in the principal sentence before πρὸς 
φωτισμὸν, 7. e., the God who commanded, eéc., and 
who hath shined in our hearts, hath shined with 
the light, ttc., (or: hath done this with the light, 
etc., supplying τοῦτο ἐποίησεν). But will not this, 
after all, be more difficult than to complete the 
sentence by supplying ἐστιν befare ὅς ἔλαμψεν (is 
the one who hath shined)? The analogy of 
chap. iii. 13 would not perhaps be decisive in fa- 
vor of this, since the completion of the sentence 
is much easier there. The easiest way would 
be, to take ὅς as equivalent to ὄυτος or αὐτός: he 
has shined. But this is only a poetic, and par- 
ticularly a Homeric usage, and only in special 
cases is ὅς ever met with as a demonstrative pro- 
ncun (comp. Passow 8. v. ὅς 1). The logical ob- 
jection, however, to the completion of the sen- 
tence by ἐστιν before ὅς ἔλαμψεν, viz., that this 
sentence would then have an emphasis which 
does not belong to it, inasmuch as the principal 
stress must be laid upon πρὸς φωτισμόν (Meyer), 
is not very convincing; for we must certainly lay 











6% 


-- -------ὦ-Φ-ΦᾧὦὦὦΦ , 





an emphasis also upon the Divine agency which 
is here so solemnly introduced, and by means of 
which Paul had been directed to, and fitted for, 
the φωτισμός. This shining of God into his heart 
is the same thing which he describes in Gal. i 
15, 16, thus: it pleased God to discover (or re- 
veal) His Son in me; for it is his own experience 
which he probably has uppermost in his mind. 
What he there says in plain words: that I might 
preach Him among the Gentiles (comp. Acts 
xxvi. 16-18), he here expresses by a figure of 
the light moving itself, thus: by the shining 
forth of the knowledge, εἰσ. By these words he 
certainly intended to say that he was the medium 
through which such a knowledge was communi- 
cated to others. But may φωτισμός be regarded 
as meaning: to make light, to show, or intransi- 
tively to shine? The latter is the only meaning 
which accords with its use in ver. 4, and the 
uniform usage, at least, of the Hellenistic 
writers.—The question may still be raised, whe- 
ther in the face of Christ (ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ) 
ought to be connected immediately with πρὸς 
φωτισμόν or with τῆς δόξης (7. e., SO as to mean the 
shining in the face of Christ, or the glory which 
was in the face of Christ)? In the first ease, γνῶσις 
must be taken objectively (not as the subjective 
knowledge of the Apostle or the Apostolic teach- 
ers, but) as the knowledge of the glory of God, 
irradiated from the face of Christ, the image of 
God (ver. 4). The sense then would be: if any 
one converts others to Christ, he makes the 
knowledge of the Divine glory beam from the 
face of Jesus Christ (Meyer after Fritzsche). 
But this explanation of the γνῶσις (knowledge), 
as if it were entirely objective, is not indispensa- 
ble, inasmuch as the words: the glory of God in 
the face of Christ, so naturally follow: who is 
the image of God (ver. 4), and so precisely cor- 
respond with these, that the article was not ne- 
cessary before ἐν προσώπῳ, especially as the idea 
of the glory of God in the face (ἐν προσώπω, τοῦ 
προσώπου) in the Mosaic type (chap. iii. 7) was 
yet present to the Apostle’s mind. The know- 
ledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus 
Christ (love, power, wisdom) was therefore sub- 
jective to the mind of the Apostle by a Divine re- 
velation to his heart (ἔλαμψεν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν). 
and then it shone around him so as to lead others 
to know Christ as their Lord, and to have fellow- 
ship also with Him. [‘‘ Christ is called the image 
of God in two respects: first (as in Col. i. 15) 
with reference to the λόγος which is in him the 
perfect representation of God; and secondly 
with reference to that human manifestation in 
which the λόγος itself was revealed (comp. chap. 
iii. 18). We have in this place to think of the 
latter relation, although the other is included in 
the idea of the historical Christ. The glory of 
God is manifested in the absolute image which 
the historical Christ sets forth.” [NeanpDEr. ] 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


The only persons who can so preach that the 
Divine glory in the Person and life of Christ, 
shall shine into the hearts of men, and cause 
them to recognize Him as their Redeemer and 
Lord, are those who have had their own hearts 
illuminated by that glory, and have mercifully 


70 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





been delivered from condemnation. But a per- 
sonal experience of that grace was never designed 
to be the limit of this revelation. When once 
the stream of Divine love has flowed into a sin- 
gle heart, from its very nature, it cannot be 
confined there, but it must struggle for comiu- 
nication. If I have myself been delivered from 
destruction, I shall long to commend the mercy 
which has saved me, to all who need the same 
experience. For the sake of Him who has saved 
me, and who has purchased those precious souls 
which are perishing around me, I shall strive to 
make men acquainted with Him in whom all 
fulness dwells, and who can satisfy all their 
wants. I shall cheerfully give myself to the 
work of winning souls to Him, and not esteem 
life itself too dear, if thereby I can bring them 
to salvation, or confirm them in its possession. 
In such circumstances the servant of Christ will 
have no room for preaching himself, that he may 
take the place of Christ by making His people 
dependent upon Him, and usurping a lordship 
over them. He will never wish to impose his 
opinions upon others, so as to impair the autho- 
rity of God’s word; and he will never be guilty 
of those tricks and intrigues which gain esteem 
at the expense of those who have a better right 
to confidence and honor. He will have no heart 
for those hypocritical arts by which others seek 
to become all things to all men (1 Cor. ix. 19- 
23), and under the guise of disinterested benevo- 
lence, flatter men’s sinful passions, and accom- 
modate themselves to the weak sides of their 
followers. Never will he think of evading by 
such arts the real difficulties of the Christian 
life, and shunning all earnest labor and self- 
denial in the pastoral work. Those who have a 
holy calling to bring their fellowmen to behold 
the Divine glory, and thus to transform them 
into Christ’s image, will rather encounter all 
cares, and reproaches, and afflictions with cheer- 
fulness. They will renounce those impure mo- 
tives which cannot bear the light, and they will 
so act and speak as to commend themselves to 
every man’s conscience. All things will be done 
as in the presence of that God who sees and 
judges the seerets of the heart.—And yet even 
when they are most faithful, their words may 
not get access to every heart. Some love dark- 
ness rather than light, and will, therefore, turn 
away from their testimony. Satan takes advan- 
tage of their aversion to truth, to bewitch them 
and to blind their understanding, so that the 
light of Christ, the image of God, cannot reach 
their hearts. God then gives them up to this 
blindness for their abuse of His testimony. As 
they would not yield to the attractions of grace, 
they are cast out of the sphere of gracious in- 
fluences, and given up to those arts of the father 
of lies, for which they have such a predisposition. 
As they had no pleasure in the truth, and would 
not believe it, they become more and more un- 
susceptible to its influence, they willingly yield 
themselves to every kind of delusion, and fall 
into superstitions in which nothing but lies can 
be received (comp. 2 Thess. ii. 10-12). 

[‘* The Gospel may be said to be hidden when 
it is never preached to a people at all, when it is 
not understood, when it does not take hold of 
the conscience, and when the heart doth not 


entertain or give reception to it. Hence this 
hiding may be either sinful or penal—sinful, 
when men hear the Gospel but will not set them- 
selves to understand it, or will not receive con- 
viction or a suitable impression from it; and 
penal, when God gives up such sinners to their 
chosen way. Such a hiding is a sad token that 
they are lost, for it is evident that they are not 
recovered and saved, and hence that they are in 
a state which both excludes what is necessary to 
their salvation, and includes what promotes 
their destruction. There can therefore be no 
hope that their state will be safe at last who live 
in the neglect of those methods which the Gos- 
pel prescribes for their salvation; and there can 
be no ground for them to fear that they shall be 
finally lost, who, with dependence on grace, are 
using these methods to their uttermost.” Con- 
densed from Howe’s Six Sermons on the Hidden 
Gospel and Lost souls]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Starke :—Ver. 1. The most faithful servant 
of Christ may become tired in his work but not 
of it. But he has only to strengthen himself in 
God and perform his part to the best of his 
ability. It is upon the end, upon the glorious 
crown that he should fix his eye.—Ver. 2. Lu- 
THER:—False Apostles sometimes make a fine 
show, but look within and they are full of filthi- 
ness (Matth. xviii. 27 f.)!—Hepincer:—Many 
vain talkers cover up their pride, avarice, envy, 
malice and bitterness, under a pretence of good 
intentions, and by this very thing show that they 
are ashamed of their own dishonesty. They 
therefore paint it up in false colors, and they 
twist and pervert the word of God so as to please 
men and sanction their carnal objects (Tit. i. 9 ff. ; 
Phil. ii. 21).—Ver. 8. Alas! that even in the 
Church the glorious Gospel should be so covered 
up! How few have so truly turned to the Lord 
that the glory of the Gospel has dawned upon 
their spirits!—Luruer:—Ver. 4. The devil is 
this world’s prince and god, and therefore God 
in righteous judgment has given it up to serve 
and to be ruled by him.—Hepincer:—Dost thou 
feel, O man, no touch of God’s word? Know 
then that the enemy is covering up thine eyes 
and thy heart (Heb. iii. 13). In the voluntary 
blinding and hardening of the unbeliever's heart, 
there is a concurrence of his own guilt and the 
malignity of Satan; for if he were not guilty Sa- 
tan could do nothing. Above all things, then, 
beware of unbelief.—Sprener:—Satan can hardly 
keep men from knowing God simply as God, for 
all nature proclaims that it has a Creator and a 
Governor. But the point on which he has a 
special desire to blind them is the knowledge of 
Christ the Son of God, and the work of salvation 
by Christ.—Ver. 5. The sum of all true preach- 
ing is Jesus Christ. Everything must run into 
Him (Col. i. 27).—Ver. 6. The best eye can see 
nothing without light. ‘In Thy light, O God, 
shall we see light” (Ps. xxxvi. 10).—If we would 
lead others to Christ, we must ourselves turn to 
Him, and receive the clear beams of faith into 
our own hearts. If we would know the mind of 
our heavenly Father, and especially how he feels 
toward men, we must direct our eyes to the face 
(i. ¢., to the words and life) of Christ, for there 


CHAP. IV. 1-6. 





we have the best expression of His heart (Jno. 
xiv. 9). 

Berens. Brsre:—Ver. 1. It is a great mercy 
when God calls a man to such a work. We 
should not, therefore, make much account of 
what we have to endure in it.—Ver. 2. Ministers 
should never attempt to draw the people by going 
around the cross and flattering them. God’s 
servants have no need of intrigues and impure 
arts.—God’s word is always the same, but it is 
very easy to add to it something of our own. It 
can be corrupted either by addition or by subtrac- 
tion, especially when one has some evil design, and 
wishes to accommodate it to a corrupt world. 
The truth is our own best evidence, but it is 

effectual only when we codperate with our con- 
sciences and open our hearts to it. The truth 
and we must meet face to face. No true minis- 
ter will be without this test of himself: that 
when he merely manifests the truth, he can ap- 
peal to every man’s conscience. If he cannot do 
this, he can do nothing.—Ver. 3. The Gospel is 
covered to those who spend their lives to no pro- 
fit and seek for life in the enjoyments of the 
flesh and in the evil suggestions of a carnal 
reason.—Ver. 4. The god of this world is sure 
to blind those who believe not and who will not 
listen candidly to God’s kind invitations. He 
will suggest to them: ‘‘If you choose that way 
you will never get along in the world.” Sucha 
god they will serve, and we need not wonder that 
their thoughts and hearts should be so occupied 
that they can receive no light. Even if the light 
shines upon them and they feel it, they turn 
away from it. Though God may penetrate 
through every obstacle till he reaches the con- 
science, he never works absolutely, 7. 6., irre- 
sistibly, and the result is not necessarily saving. 
Light may shine clearly and yet a man may not 
perceive it: 1, If the windows of his house are 
closed and all around him is darkened (false 
principles and erroneous views); 2, If his eyes 
(the windows of his body) are so closed that no 
light can enter them (misunderstandings and 
perversions of revealed truth). The first obstacle 
is removed when the armor of light is put on; 
and when with the help of a Stronger, the strong- 
holds of reason are demolished. The other is 
removed without violating the established laws 
of moral and intellectual freedom, when the pre- 
venting grace of God destroys Satan’s work in 
the heart and prepares it to welcome and enter- 
tain the light of revealed truth. God therefore 
first makes an assault upon our wills. When the 
sun is admitted the darkness flies of course. God 
does not arbitrarily force us to receive the light, 
but we must receive it by a free faith. The only 
reason that many have no light is, they love the 
world more than God. The spirit of the world 
holds possession of them. The arch-deceiver 
makes the poor soul think: “Surely it is not 
necessary to give up everything; we may retain 
this thing and that, and still be Christians; 
others do so, and are nevertheless very good 
people; God does not require us to be so very 
strict.” These are the lies which many admit 
with greater readiness than they do the truth 
and the glory of the Gospel. God is resisted by 
them as if He were an enemy, and was preparing 
to inflict on them some great calamity and injus- 











7 





tice. When the love of self is the reigning prin- 
ciple in the heart, there can be no interest in the 
glory of Christ, and the image of the sinful 
Adam will be inscribed over the whole man.— 
Ver. 5. Where shall we find those who preach 
nothing but Jesus Christ? We meet with many 
who are eager to obtain honor and personal com- 
fort; but so absorbing is their interest in them- 
selves, that they have very little time or heart 
to give to Christ.—Ver. 6. God’s works are all 
in harmony. The illumination of a soul like 
that of the natural world is a Divine work, a 
new creation, and can be effected only by the fiat 
of the Almighty. Our hearts are at first in 
chaotic darkness, and the type of the process by 
which they become temples of God must be 
sought in what took place at the beginning. As 
the first day’s work was the separation of the 
light from the darkness, so the first work of 
grace in the heart is to give it light. We must 
allow Christ to break through the darkness of 
our hearts and discover it to us, or we shall never 
see the light. But the mere admission of the 
light is not enough; it must be received into the 
most secret recess of the heart. Then, when the 
light of a true knowledge is received, how clearly 
do we see our poverty, but how clearly also 
the wonders of grace! The darkness is past 
and the true light shines (1 Jno. ii. 8). But 
this light of Jesus Christ must necessarily shine 
beyond ourselves. Others also will see it and be 
enkindled and won to Christ. One great object 
of the vocation wherewith we are called is to 
make us God’s witnesses.—God is to be known 
only as we look upon the face of the only begot- 
ten Son (Jno.i.18). God never presents Himself 
to us in an absolute manner, but only through this 
face. Such is the old but sublime theology which 
was always so precious to His humble ones. 
There we may look upon God and our lives be 
preserved (Gen. xxxii. 30). Butsuch a sight can 
often be gained only by a wrestling like Jacob’s, 
and with a painful discovery of our poverty. 
But no sooner is this sight gained than we are 
drawn toward God. We can bear to look upon 
the Deity Himself, even in His glory, when we 
behold Him in the face of a Mediator (Ps. lxxxix. 
16; Ex. xxix. 10 f.; xxxiii. 14). 

Rieger, Ver. 1, 2:—The unjust treatment 
which the word of faith sometimes receives, and 
the unhappy results which sometimes follow its 
dispensation, are no reason why those who are 
called to preach it should renounce their hope or 
their enjoyment of it; nor should they thus be 
tempted to use means which are unsuitable to 
their work. Never should they keep back doc- 
trines or precepts which belong to the mind of 
Christ, from a fear that they might injure His 
cause. Let them never show punctiliousness in 
matters which are known and judged of by their 
fellowmen, while they tolerate great imperfec- 
tions in those which none but the eye of God can 
discern. Let them use no means to please men 
which would not be commended by God and ap- 
proved of in the consciences of all who see them, 
and which would not tend to bring out the truth 
in still clearer terms.—Ver. 3, 4. The god of 
this world has a great variety of instruments 
conspiring together to promote his wicked pur- 


| pose of covering up the Gospel from the eyes of 


72 





men.—The unbelieving world is always inclined 
to throw out the suspicion that ministers are 
seeking only their private interests. But those 
who have accepted Jesus as their Lord, will 
cheerfully confide in His servants, and in the 
arrangements He has made respecting them.— 
Ver. 6. In one of His first acts God acquired a 
peculiar name: ‘‘He who called the light out of 
darkness.”” That ancient name He still main- 
tains by similar manifestations of His power on 
a larger or smaller scale; but especially by the 
revelation of His Son in the hearts of men through 
the Gospel. In the life of Christ we have concen- 
trated as in a single person, and everything given 
which we need to reveal God to us, and to make 
us trust in Him as our Father. The Apostles 
have given us so complete and so credible a tes- 
timony of what they saw of Christ, that we may 
have from their preaching and writings the same 
impressions which they had from His personal 
presence. Truly blessed is every reader whose 
faith looks steadily and with an unveiled face 
upon Jesus! 

Hevsner, Ver. 1:—Keep your eye upon the 
greatness and sanctity of your calling, and you 
will be in no danger of falling.—Ver. 2. The 
only way for a preacher, is always to be open 
and honest.—God’s word should be preached in 
its purity as it was preached at first, with no 
recent improvements or disfigurements; for not 
only must it be a great sin, in the Lord’s sight, 
to present in His name what is not His, but we 
shall thus deprive His word of its real power.— 
Luter: Counterfeiters of money are burned, 
but falsifiers of God’s word are canonized.— 
Ver. 3. Though the truth and power of the Gos- 
pel are hidden from the eyes of many, it is only 
to them that are lost, and because they would 
not believe.-—Ver. 4. A good or an evil spirit 
rules allmen. Why it is by the one rather than 
by the other, must ever remain one of the mys- 
teries of human freedom, for the result is not 
always according to the power of the outward 
influence. The corru;t mind may truly be said 
to be blinded, when the world is regarded as the 
only thing real or glorious, when the world’s 
vanities appear to be all that is substantial, and 
when the Gospel and Christ’s glories are counted 
as nothing. Christ, His glory, His love, His 
holiness, His power, His government, and His 
Divine excellence, are the substance of the Gos- 
pel. He is the image of God, so that as the Son 
is, the Father must be.—Ver. 5. The Gospel has 
an enlightening power, for it is not a system of 
human inventions; and those who preach it are 
not founding systems of philosophy, nor leading 
off new sects or schools of religious belief;, but 
they present Christ as the Master of every other 
master, and the only Rock of all wisdom, right- 
eousness and salvation.—Ver. 6. When Christ 
enlightens a soul, it is as great a miracle as the 
creation of a world. As the physical light 
enables us to discern God’s power and glory in 
the natural universe, so the light of faith enables 
us to recognize His glory in the spiritual uni- 
verse.—The highest grace is that look of grace 
God gives us when we experience His grace.— 
Every thing which belongs to Christ’s manifesta- 
tion to men, is a reflection of the Deity. What 





ΤΑ ἢ 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


then was the lustre upon Moses’ face compared 
with the light in which God manifests Himself? 

W. F. Besser, Ver. 2:—An ingenuous deport- 
ment is the glory, and an artful concealment ig 
the shame of a minister of Christ. Every man’s 
conscience recognizes with more or less distinct- 
ness what God commands or forbids; and hence 
when the Gospel is manifested to it, a ready 
witness there gives an affirmation to the truth; 
and when this affirmation is withheld, the con- 
science of the lover of lies feels the penal brand 
(1 Tim. iv. 2). The consciousness of his guilt is 
indelibly fixed in his soul. The conscience of 
believers is good; it is polluted with no corrup- 
tions, and it is restrained by no fears; while 
that of unbelievers is vicious, defiled and bur- 
dened; it perpetually accuses them that are lost 
because they obey not the truth.—Ver. 3. It 
may do us no harm to remain ignorant of some 
truths, but we are lost forever if we know not 
the Gospel.—Ver. 4. The special work of the 
great Corrupter is to corrupt still more them that 
are lost. In this work, however, he is only 
God’s executioner. This blinding is nothing but 
a punishment for the sin of unbelief (Eph. ii. 
2), for loving darkness so much that the light 
was necessarily hated (John iii. 19, 20), and for 
being so much devoted to earthly things, that all 
the blessings of heaven offered in the Gospel, are 
rejected with scorn. The blindness itself is 
effected by covering up the Gospel, by mystify- 
ing God’s clear word, by misconstruing the 
obvious meaning of what God has done, and by 
closing the eyes against the truth as it is dis- 
pensed in the Church.—Ver. 6. The very cen- 
tral point of man’s nature, his heart’s treasure 
(Matth. xii. 85), has been darkened ever since 
he became a sinner; the Spirit of God, the light 
of his life has been put out. It is indeed true 
that the heart (where the conscience has its 
laboratory) is always aware to some extent, that 
its life and rest should be in God, but this light 
of conscience cannot give life; it is rather a 
deadly lightning (Rom. i. 82) to those who have 
fallen from Divine fellowship. If in our hearts 
there ever springs up a spiritual light by 
which we recognize spiritual things, just as we 
behold the works of creation by the natural 
light, it must be by the act of that same God 
who in the beginning commanded the light to 
shine out of darkness (Ps. xviii. 29), This work 
of the Almighty Creator, in which He irradiates 
man’s darkened heart, is just the counterpart of 
that work of this world’s god in which the mind 
of the unbeliever is blinded. 

[‘‘The Christian ministry: I. As a ministry 
of Light. It does not make the objects of faith; 
it only unveils or manifests them as they are. 
To live in sin is to live a false life—a life of lies 
—in which a man is untrue to his own nature. 
The Gospel does not make God our Father; it 
only reveals Him as He had ever been, is, and 
ever shall be; not a tyrant but a Father; not a 
chance or a necessary thing but a Person; and 
in the life of Christ the love of God has become 
intelligible tous. So it throws light on man’s 
nature; shows him with God-like aspirations and 
animal cravings; a‘glorious temple in ruins, to 
be re-built into a habitation of God through the 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 73 
NE -- 
Spirit. It throws light upon the grave and the | the truth. This light is the true evidence οὔ. 
things of that undiscovered land beyond. Hence | Christianity. II. As a reflection, in word, and 
our life is to be a perpetual manifestation of the | experience of the life of Christ.” F. W. Ropzrt- 
Gospel, and a diffusion of the light of the Gospel; | son, Lect, XL.]. 
while the evil and worldly heart is ever hiding 


IX.—THE WORTHLESS AND FEEBLE APPEARANCE OF MINISTERS. CONFIDENCE 
IN VIEW OF THE GLORIOUS RESULT OF THEIR AFFLICTIONS. 


Cuarter IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 


7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency [exceeding great-- 
8 ness] of the power may be of God, and not of us. We are troubled on every side [In 
every way we are hard pressed], yet not distressed [inextricably straitened]; we are- 
9 perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not de- 
10 stroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord [om. the Lord] 
‘11 Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. For we which 
live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake, that the life also of Jesus might be; 
12 made manifest in our mortal flesh. So then [that] death worketh in us, but life in you. 
13 We [But] having the same Spirit of faith, according as it is written, “I believe, and 
14 [om. and}* therefore have I spoken ;” we also believe, and therefore speak; knowing 
that he which raised up the Lord* Jesus shall raise up us also by [with]® Jesus, and 
15 shall present us with you. For all things are for your sakes, that the abundant grace: 
might through the thanksgiving of many redound [that the grace, becoming more. 
abundant in consequence of the greater number, might multiply (περισσεύσῃ) the. 
16 thanksgiving] to the glory of God. For which cauge we faint not*; but though our: 
outward man perish [is wasting away, διαφθείρεται], yet the [our] inward’ man is re-. 
17 newed day by day. For our light affliction, which is but for a moment’, worketh for 
18 us a far more exceeding and [om. and] eternal weight of glory; while we look not at 
the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which 
are seen are temporal [temporary, πρόσχαιρα], but the things which are not seen are 
eternal. 


V. For we know that, if our earthly house of this tabernacle [tent-dwelling] were dis-. 
solved, we have [in the heavens] a building of [from, ἐχ] God; a house not made with 
2 hands, eternal [,]in the heavens [om.in the heavens]. For in this [also] we groan, earn-. 
3 estly desiringto be clothed upon with [to put on over this] owr house which is from 
4 heaven: if so be that [since indeed, εἴγε zat]? being clothed” we shall not be found naked. 
For [even] we that are in this [the] tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that. 
we would be unclothed, [because we are not willing to be unclothed], but clothed upon, 
5 that mortality [our mortal part] might be swallowed up of [by] life. Now [But] he- 
that hath wrought us [out] for the self-same thing is God, who also [om. also}* hath. 
6 given unto us the earnest of the Spirit. Theretore we are [Being] always confident, 
7 knowing that, whilst we are at [in our] home in the. body, we are absent from [our- 
8 home in] the Lord: for we walk by faith, not by sight [appearance]: we are confident, 
9 JI say, and willing [well pleased] rather to be absent from the body, and to be present: 
with the Lord. Wherefore [also] we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may, 
10 be accepted of [acceptable to] him. For we must all appear [be made manifest] before: 
the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in [through]} 
his body, according to that he hath done, whether 7¢ be [were] good or bad.!*' 

1 Ver. 10.—Rec. has τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ in opposition to the best authorities [viz.: A. B.C. Ὁ. BE. F. G. Sim af αὖ, Tt ia 
sustained only by K. L. and some versions and three of the best Greek fathers. Sin. has τοῖς σώμασιν. instead of the se 
κα Ver, 12. Ree. has ὁ μὲν θάνατος, but it is feebly sustained. [Alford thinks it was “inserte@ to correspond to δὰ 
as er, 13.~-Sin. alone has καὶ after the first dio. After yeypau. of ver. 13, the Cod. Alex. (A.) is entirely lost until 


chap. xii. 7.] 
4 Ver. 14,—Without sufficient authority, Lachm. has thrown out τὸν κύριον. 


74 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


Te. eae σου οὐ συ συ." 
5 Ver. 14.—The διὰ of the Rec. is not as well sustained as σὺν before Ἰησοῦ. It was intended probably for a correction 
[ALForD: “‘on account of the difficulty found in σὺν ᾿Ιησοῦ being joined to a future verb, his resurrection being past.” 


Σὺν is given in B. C. Ὁ. F. Sin. (1st cor.).] 


6 Ver. 16.—As in ver. 1, ἐκκακοῦμεν is preferable to ἐγκακοῦμεν, and for reasons similar to those there given. 


7 Ver. 16.—Lachm. has good authorities for his reading: 


“ὃ ἔσω ἡμῶν, and yet his reading is probably not genuine, but 


arose from an attempt to make it correspond with ὁ ἔξω ἡμῶν: [The same reason probably produced the reading ἔξωθεν 
instead of ἔξω, 7. e., to make it correspond with ὁ ἔσωθεν after the latter had been accepted as the true reading. But even 
ἔσωθεν is not satisfactorily sustained. ᾿Ἡμῶν is also inserted by high authority (B. C. Ὁ. E. F. Sin.) after ἔσω. Tisch. and 


Rec. omit it after ἔσωθεν. 
for uniformity.) 


Alford (but with a doubt) and Stanley insert it with ἔσω. 


Meyer suggests that it was inserted 


[8 Ver. 17.—Before ἐλαφρὸν D. (1st cor.) E. F. G., the Vulg. Syr. and Goth. versions, and some of the Latin fathers read 


πρόσκαιρον καὶ, but it was probably a gloss upon παραυτίκα. 


πρόσκαιρον in Theodt.]} 


Comp. διὰ τοῦ παραυτίκα ἔδειξε τὸ βραχύ τε Kar 


9 Ver. 3.—Lach. has εἴπερ, Rec. has εἴγε. The latter is sustained by the testimony only of C. K. Γ,., but by the strong 


authority of nearly all the cursives and all the Greek fathers. 


Meyer, however, thinks it an arbitrary change by sume 


transcriber. [Sinaiticus has since given its testimony for εἴγε. The great majority of the recent critical editions now adopt 


εἴγε. 
ὑ ty Ver. 3.—Rec. and Lach. have ἐνδυσάμενοι instead of ἐκδυσάμενοι. Both readings are well supported. See Exeget. 


Notes. 


to define σκήνει. 


1 Ver. 4.—After σκήνει Lachmann inserts τούτῳ ; the evidence is nut decisive. Meyer thinks it was added more clearly 


12 Ver, 5.—Excellent authorities are in favor of ὁ Sovs.—Rec. and Tisch. have ὁ xau δούς with equally good authority. 


18 Ver. 10.—Kec. and Lachm. have κᾶκόν. 


Tisch. has φαῦλον, but without sufficient authority. [B. Ὁ. E. F. α. K. lb 


favor κακόν, and C. and Sin. favor φαῦλον. The Greek and cursives are divided nearly equally. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Ver. 7. [This glorious ministry was intrusted to 
weak and decaying vessels. ‘‘As the Apostle had 
spoken many and great things of the indescribable 
glory, there was danger that some would say, 
‘How can those who have such glory continue 
in these mortal bodies?’ He, therefore, says 
that this is indeed a matter of chief surprise, and 
a remarkable instance of Divine power, that an 
earthen vessel should be able to endure such ex- 
treme splendor, and to hold in custody so great 
a treasure.” Curysostom. He insensibly passes 
to the Divine supports which he experienced 
under the weaknesses of his body and the diffi- 
culties of his work].—But we have this trea- 
sure in earthen vessels.—The δέ leads us on 
to the exhibition of the contrast between the 
glory of which he had just been speaking, and 
the infirmity and afflicted state of those who were 
its possessors. We can hardly suppose that he 
is here directly defending himself against objec- 
tions which had been formally arrayed against 
him (see Meyer); aud yet he doubtless had his 
‘eye on those opponents who had endured much 
less for Christ’s cause. (comp. chap. xi. 23 ff.). 
—The word treasure indicates the great value 
of the Divine illumination (ver. 6), and of course 
implies the importance of the office which is di- 
rected to the diffusion of the light of the know- 
ledge, ete. In contrast with this is the ὀστράκινα 
oxevn, clayey vessel, which is of a cheap and fra- 
gile nature. We naturally expect that a valua- 
ble possession will be deposited in precious and 
valuable vessels. In this he has no reference to 
some special insignificance or weakness of his 
person, or to some peculiar sickliness of his bo- 
dily frame, nor indeed 6 himself exclusively 
(σκεύεσιν, καρδίαις, ver. 6), but according to his 
usage, to the general state of the human body, 
perishable as it always is, and destined to disso- 
lution. (comp. ver. 16; chap. νυ. 1 ff. ).—[The 
word oxevoc, as applied to the human body, had 
almost lost its metaphorical character among 
the Greeks. (comp. Rom. ix. 22, 28; 1 Pet. iii. 75. 
2 Tim. ii. 21), The Platonists spoke of two bo- 
dies; one (ὄχημα ψυ χῆς) was the external chariot 
or vehicle of the soul, and the other (ὄστράκινον 
σκεῦος) was the frail body which the soul inhabits 
as the testacea do their shell. The substantive 
ὄστρακον signifies either burnt clay, with any 





thing made of it, a piece of tile, and especially 
the tablet used in voting (hence ostracise), or 
the hard shrell of the testacea. The latter seems 
to have been the most ancient meaning, and the 
two significations are connected, perhaps because 
shells were at first used as vessels, or were the 
material from which vessels were made. Cury- 
sostom: ‘*Our mortal nature is nothing better 
constituted than. earthen ware; for it is soon 
damaged, and by death and disease, and varia- 
tions of temperature and ten thousand other 
things, easily dissolved.” Dr. Hodge, Neander 
and Billroth think that earthen vessels here 
signify not the frail bodies merely, but the whole 
human nature of ministers since it is not solely 
on account of their corporeal frailty that they are 
incompetent to produce the effects which flow 
from their ministrations. But though the fact 
here assumed is true, the mind of the Apostle 
was evidently here fixed upon the body alone; as 
is clear from the usage of ὄστράκινον σκεῦος, and 
from the equivalent phrases (our outward man, 
and our earthly tent in which we dwell) in ver. 
16 and chap. v.i.]. In the apparent unsuitable- 
‘ness of such an arrangement, he discovered a 
Divine purpose of an exalted character..-That 
the exceeding greatness of the power 
may be seen to be God’s and not ours.— 
[On the telic and not ecbatic signification of iva 
consult Winer @ 57, p. 855]. The exceeding 
greatness of the power (ὑπερβολὴ (found also in 
chap. xii. 7) τῆς δυνάμεως) signifies the power 
which was so triumphant in the whole sphere of 
the Apostolic ministry to convert and enlighten 
men, notwithstanding the afflictions, persecu- 
tions, difficulties and conflicts which had to he 
endured. (comp. ver. 8 ff.). It was in these 
very circumstances that its superiority to every 
other agency had been shown {δύναμις 1 Cor. iv. 
20).—The like γένηται in Rom. vii. 18, and 
εἶναι in Rom. iii. 26, has the logical import of 
φανῇ or εὑρηϑῇ οὖσα [i. e., may appear to be.]. The 
genitive θεοῦ has the force of, belonging to God; 
and it is contrasted with ἐξ ἡμων: going out 
from us. ‘ 

Vers. 8-10. [All the sentences in this passage 
are participial, and yet they are not inappropri- 
ately rendered in our A. V. in the first person 
of the present Indicative. ‘In each of these 
pairs of antitheses the signification of the second 
is cognate to that of the first; in those in chap. 
vi. 9, 10, contrary: each second is also here the 


CHAP. 1V. 7-18. V. 1-10. 


74 





extreme of the first.” Wesster & WiLKINson]. 
They are connected in signification with the pre- 
ceding verse, in which had been announced the 
design or end God had in view. He thus asserts 
that the superabundant power which was exhib- 
ited in his Apostolical work belonged entirely to 
that God who helped him and carried him 
through all his distresses and infirmities.—We 
are pressed in every way but not strait- 
ened.— Ep παντὶ signifies here, not in all places, 
but in every way and on every occasion, as 
in chap. vii. 5. [Dr. Hodge also suggests that 
the words belong to all the following clauses, 
and not merely to the first]. Στενοχωρεῖσϑαι 
signifies to be hemmed in a narrow space from 
which there is no exit. [Sraniey: pressed for 
room, but still having room]. 
in chap. vi. 4, and xii. 10. As οὐ στενοχωρούμενοι, 
in which God’s power is displayed, is related to 
ϑλιβόμενοι, so is οὐκ ἐξαπορούμενοι to ἀπορούμενοι : 
—perplexed but not despairing.—The word 
ἀπορούμενοι signifies, to come into perplexities, 
and éarop. to come into such extreme despair, 
that one knows not what to do or where to look 
for help. [Sranney: losing our way, but not en- 
tirely; bewildered, but not benighted]. There 
is probably in this antithesis an allusion, not 
merely to his external, but to his internal state; 
for under distressing and straitened circum- 
stances, under fatigue and hostile assaults, the 
mind becomes oppressed, and hence perplexed 
andindespair. In such a condition God’s power 
had been revealed, so that in the midst of his 
human infirmities, he had not been reduced to 
extremity, nor been without counsel or hope.— 
Persecuted, but not forsaken (ver. 9).— 
He here begins to speak of outward circum- 
stances. In διωκόμενοι and ἐγκαταλειπόμενοι the 
metaphor is not that of a foot-race [pursued, but 
not left behind, (Olshausen, Stanley,) for the 
Apostle is speaking, not of rivalry from those 
who as runners had the same end in view, but 
of troubles and persecutions” ALtrorp]; for 
διώκεσθαι, as in 1 Cor. iv. 12, signifies to be per- 
secuted (so dcwyyoi in chap. xii. 10), and éyxara- 
λείπεσθαι, to be left under persecutions, to be 
abandoned without help (see Meyer). The 
word occurs also in2 Tim. iv. 16. The figure 
of a conflict runs through both clauses of the 
verse:—cast down, but not destroyed; 
καταβαλλόμενοι is an advance beyond the mean- 
ing of διωκόμενοι, for it asserts that he was not 
only chased, but pulled or stricken down to the 
ground. Neanper: ‘ We have here the compa- 
rison of a combatant who is indeed thrown down 
by his antagonist in the conflict, and is awaiting 
his death blow, but who, after all, succeeds in 
rising again.’”’ The Catholic interpretation is: 
“‘ one whois seized in his flight, and is prostrated, 
but not slain.”’ Not being destroyed was the con- 
sequence of not being forsaken. In ver. 10 the 
apostolic sufferings are set forth in their highest 
degree of intensity, as an extreme peril of life it- 
self, a perpetual hanging in suspense:—always 
bearing about in our body the dying of 
Jesus. (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 31; Rom. viii. 36).— 
Néxpwore is a killing, or putting to death, but it has 
also an intransitive signification, a dying; here 


The noun occurs | 





11). The dying of Jesus is represented as per- 
manently connected with his body in such a way 
that he was never without it, and always carried 
it with him. [It was a perpetual νέκρωσις, a 
dying, but never a ϑάνατος, death]. It was some- 
thing which attached to him in consequence of 
his common fellowship with Jesus in his mode 
of life and his office, and accompanied him 
wherever he was. [CHRYsosToM: we are shown 
every day dying, that we may also be seen every 
day rising again]. Those explanations miss the 
true sense of the Apostle, which describe it as a 
violent death from wounds (Gal. vi. 17), or a sick- 
ness which contained the seeds of death (Riic- 
kert). The antithesis is introduced in the follow- 
ing final sentence—that the life also of Jesus 
may be manifested in our body—where we 
are told the purpose or design which God had in 
view when He permitted such sufferings (comp. 
ver.7). Thelife of Jesus, the ζωὴ, contrasted with 
the νέκρωσις, signifies that life which is the trium- 
phant result of the death of Jesus, viz: the life 
which He had in His resurrection. Its manifes- 
tation in the body of the Apostle was probably 
nothing but the fact that although he was always 
in danger of death, he always came forth alive 
out of his deadly perils. The idea is that of 
unity with Christ or resemblance to Christ in 
His life, as before in His dying. The context 
and the contrast suggest this. Though Jesus or 
the life of Jesus may have been the source of this 
life, such is not the assertion of the text, and 
such an assertion would not be suitable to the 
context. If we attempt to unite the two ideas in 
one explanation, we only mingle together two 
distinct representations (life in its unity and 
resemblance, and life in its energy). Ina sub.’ 
sequent part of the Apostle’s discourse (ver. 14 ff.) 
the glorification of the body in the resurrection 
is perhaps atopic of consideration, but no allu- 
sion is made to it here. Still less is there any 
reference to a spiritual or moral influence, as 
though the Apostle would assert that the same 
living power through which Christ was raised 
and now lives, might be seen in the invincible 
energy of soul which he exhibited in the midst 
of all his adversities (de Wette). It is inconsis- 
tent with such a view that he uses the phrase, in 
our body (ἐν τῷ σώματι ἡμῶν), and the correspond- 
ing expression, in our mortal flesh (ἐν τῇ ϑνῃτῇ 
σαρκί ἡμῶν, ver. 11, comp. also chap. vi. 9); and 
it is not a sufficient explanation of this idea to 
say, that his official influence is conceived of in 
its outward manifestation, in connection with 
and acting through the feeble members of his 
body (Osiander). [It is, however, against this 
wholly natural view of the life of Jesus acting in 
Paul’s body that, in ver. 12, he speaks of it as 
acting through him upon the Corinthians, and in 
them producing spiritual effects (comp. Alford. 
But see notes on that ver.). ‘Perhaps Paul 
does not refer to any single thing in the life 
of the Lord Jesus, but means that he did this in 
order that in all things the same life, the same 
kind of living which characterized the Lord 
Jesus might be manifested in him; so that he 
resembled Him in his sufferings and trials, in 
order that in all things he might have the same 


in a physical and not an ethical sense. (comp. ver. αὶ life in his body.” —Barnes]. 


Ver. 11. For we which live are ever 
delivered unto death.—This is an explana- 
tion and a confirmation of what had been said in 
ver. 10. Corresponding with the bearing about 
the dying of Jesus in the body, we have here a 
being delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake. And 
yet it does not follow that the dying of Jesus 
was precisely the same as the dying for Jesus’ 
sake. The thought (ver. 10) of the identity of 
the dying (in behalf of the same cause) is modi- 
fied in ver. 11 by becoming a deliverance unto 
death for Jesus’ sake. Both ideas, however, are 
fundamentally the same, so far as the cause of 
God’s kingdom, for which both Jesus and His 
Apostle endured such deadly sufferings, and the 
person and name of Jesus himself, were essen- 
tially connected. In διὰ "Ijoovv, here rendered, 
for Jesus’ sake, διά indicates the true reason but 
not the object had in view (to glorify Jesus), al- 
though the canse and the design are closely 
united. Much less does this preposition mean 
the same thing as: auctoritate Jesu, for it cannot 
have reference to the motive of the action, inas- 
much as the deliverance (παραδιδόμεϑα) is pas- 
sive, and can have no allusion to the voluntari- 
ness of the subject of the action. The being de- 
livered to death (εἰς ϑάν. παδιδ.) is intensified by 
the contrast implied in, we who are alive (ἡμεῖς 
οἱ ζῶντες), as if they were delivered up to death 
in full life. Neanper: ‘‘Now we seem in the 
midst of life and a moment afterwards we are 
given up to death.” This is neither an anticipa- 
tion of what is said in the succeeding final sen- 
tence (as if the Apostle had intended to say: we 
who are kept alive), nor is it the same as to say: 
‘¢as long as we live;”’ nor is it a feeble expres- 
sion by which he would inform us: we who are 
still alive while so many of our fellow-Christians 
are dead; nor, moreover, is it to be taken as an 
emphatic description of the spiritual life (Osian- 
der, Bisping); those in whom Jesus’ life acts to 
make them His organs of communication with 
men must have life through the spirit and power 
of faith (Jno. 111, 86; xi. 25; Gal.ii. 20). Such 
a view as is contained in this last mode of inter- 
pretation could derive support only from the final 
sentence in ver. 10, as itis explained by de Weite. 
The deliverance to death was accomplished 
through the agency of men, but it must be re- 
ferred ultimately to God (ὑπὸ τοῦ Deo), inasmuch 
as the final sentence indicates that there was a 
Divine purpose in the case.—that the life also 
of Jesus may be manifested in our mor- 
tal flesh.—In the inference which is drawn in 
this final sentence, the words, in our mortal 
flesh (ἐν τῇ θνητῇ capKi ἡμῶν), are emphatic, and 
are an augmentation of the thought expressed in 
ver. 10 respecting the manifestation in our body 
(ἐν τῷ σώματι): or perhaps they are a stronger 
expression to bring into more striking contrast 
the revelation of Jesus’ life, inasmuch as this life 
must become more manifest in the midst of this 
weakness and frailty of the body. 

Ver. 12. So then death worketh in us 
but life in you.—We have here the result of 
what he had-just described, and its relation to 
the Corinthian Church. We should naturally 
have expected in such an expression ὁ μὲν ϑάνα- 
toc (lect. rec.), but the particle was probably 
left out by the Apostle intentionally, that the 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


eee a ee ae πα 


contrast might be the more striking. Death and 
life were both active powers (as in every other 
part of the New Testament ἐνεργεῖται must be 
taken in an active and not in a passive significa- 
tion.) Death was working in the Apostle, inas- 
much as he was always exposed to death (yy. 10, 
11), but life was working in the Corinthians. 
But in what sense was this true of the Corin- 
thians? Not directly but mediately, in the de- 
gree in which Jesus’ life was revealed in the 
Apostle’s body. The connection with vy. 10, 11 
seems to demand this. It was by the Apostle’s 
dangers that he came into just the position to 
exert his apostolic powers for their good. While, 
therefore, he felt the continual influence of death, 
they were receiving a perpetual stream of quick- 
ening energies from his death. We are neither 
compelled to understand (with de Wette and Osi- 
ander) the life (ζω7) here spoken of as meaning 
the higher spiritual life, the Divine power which 
was glorified in the Apostle’s sufferings and its 
working (ἐνεργεῖται), as expressing the beneficial 
influence of his ministry in implanting and 
strengthening their faith, nor would we be justi- 
fied in giving such a turn to the thought. [On 
the other hand Alford contends that the idea of 
Christ’s natural life acting upon the Corinthians 
through Paul, is much forced. ‘In Rom. viii. 
10 f., the vivifying influence of His Spirit, who 
raised Jesus from the dead is spoken of as ex- 
tending to the body also; here the upholding in- 
fluence of Him who delivers and preserves the 
body is spoken of as vivifying the whole man: 
life, in both places, being the higher and spiritual 
life, including the lower and natural. ‘And in 
our relative positions—ye are examples of this 
life since ye are a church of believers, alive to 
God through Christ in your various vocations, 
and not called upon to be θεατριζόμεγοι as we are, 
who are (not indeed excluded from that life— 
nay, it flows from us to you—but are) more 
especially examples of conformity to the death of 
our common Lord, in whom death works.” 
‘‘ Death and life are personified, and the one is 
operative in Paul and the other in the Corin- 
thians.’”—Hover]. Entirely unsuitable to the 
whole tenor of the Epistle and of this particular 
section would be the supposition of an irony in 
which the Apostle contrasts his own extreme 
perils with the peace and prosperity of the Co- 
rinthians. Comp. 1 Cor. iv. 8 (Chrysostom, Cal- 
vin). 

Vers. 13, 14.—But having the same spi- 
rit of faith (as it is written, I believed, 
therefore I spoke).—The Apostle now passes 
on to the spiritual side of the description he was 
giving uf the Divine power in him (ver. 7). [But 
though you might think this working of death 
discouraging to us, it is not so in fact; for we 
are animated by two great principles: first, an 
assured faith that we shall participate with you 
in the benefits of the Gospel (vers. 18-16), and 
secondly, a confident hope of a glorious renova- 
tion (vers. 16-18). Our version omits the con- 
necting particle dé which expresses the contrast 
between what follows and what precedes: death 
worketh indeed in us, but] the same spirit of 
faith impels us to speak to our fellow-men and to 
make known the Gospel, which had been ex- 
pressed in that passage of Scripture, in which it 





Ad 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 


hi . 





is said: I believed, therefore I spoke. The dé 
also introduces an additional point in the dis- 
course. The Spirit of faith denotes, not the spi- 
rit or disposition of faith, but the Spirit of God, 
which produced faith in the heart, the Spirit 
which he had received, which dwelt in him, and 
whose organ he was in the ministration of the 
Spirit. Chap. iii. 8; comp. the spirit of meek- 
ness in 1 Cor. iy. 21; Gal. vi. 1, οὐ al. Nean- 
per: ‘‘the Apostle is here speaking of that pe- 
culiar influence of the Holy Spirit by which he 
acquired a confirmed confidence in God that he 
would come forth triumphant over all death, and 
that every thing would promote the welfare of 
himself and of the whole Church.” Τὸ αὐτό re- 
fers not to the faith of the Corinthians (the same 
which ye have), for the context suggests nothing 
of this kind, and the Apostle is speaking of the 
Corinthians only as the receivers or objects of 
his beneficial agency, but to the τὸ γεγραμμένον 
with its contents: the same spirit of confidence 
in God which is expressed in the following pas- 
sage of the Scriptures. The passage is found in 
Ps. exvi. 10, though it is taken from the LXX., 
and does not give us the precise translation 


of the original Heb. DIN ye SPINA: {5} 


believed, for I ΒΡ ῖκο."" [Comp. Hengstenberg on 
the Psalms.]. This, however, conducts us essen- 
tially to the same idea, for the speech, the dis- 
course of the psalmist, expressive of prayerful 
submission, thankfulness and hope (vers. 1-9), 
is something in which faith is shown, and must 
have proceeded from faith. Brnaut says: “ΝῸ 
sooner does faith exist than she begins to speak 
to others, and while speaking recognizes herself 
and grows in power.”—Like the Psalmist, we 
also believe and therefore speak.—The be- 
lieving of the Apostle, like that of. the Psalmist, 
was a firm assurance that the quickening power 
of the Lord would help him through, and deliver 
him out of all his distresses. From this proceeds 
a spirit of praise for the deliverance given him; 
for in his preaching and in his testimony before 
the Church, his great object was to glorify God. 
—But the faith which moved him to speak in- 
volved also a confident hope that the power of 
God would ever afterwards be manifested in 
him, ver. 14:— Knowing that He who 
raised up the Lord Jesus.—We have εἰδότες 
in like manner in 1 Cor. xv. 58. The basis of 
this hope was the Divine fact on which all his 
faith and his salvation rested, 1 Cor. xv. 13 ff.; 
Rom. viii. 11, οὐ al. The substance of this con- 
fidence was, that he who had raised up the Lord 
Jesus, will raise up us also with Jesus.— 
The most natural and probably the correct view 
of this passage leads our thoughts to the general 
resurrection. The fact that in other passages 
Paul holds before himself and his fellow-be- 
lievers of that period the possibility that they 
might be changed without dying (1 Cor. xv. 52; 
1 Thess. iv. 15 f.), does not militate against such 
a view, for he also intimates (chap. v. 8) that they 
miht possibly be called to die, and we may in- 
clude under the general idea of being raised up, 
the more special one of a simple change (comp. 
on 1 Cor. vi. 14). Instead of civ one would 
more naturally have expected διὰ or ἐν, 1 Cor. 
xv. 21,22. But just as in ἄξει civ αὐτῷ, 1 Thess. 








iv. 14, the fellowship with him into which they 
were to be introduced, was pointed out, so the 
resurrection with Jesus in this place is a pattern 
which, in like manner, is founded upon a fellow- 
ship with Him, and is its highest realization and 
glorification, Eph. ii. 6; Col. ii. 12; iii. 1. Ofa 
resurrection with Jesus, in some other sense 
than that of a bodily resurrection, the Apostle 
never speaks, except in the past tense. No inti- 
mation is given of a deliverance from the peril of 
death (Meyer), and the words, with Jesus, are 
at least no more fitted to such an idea than they 
are to ἐγείρειν in the sense of a literal resurrec- 
tion of the dead. If the former is a common 
fellowship in the lot of the risen Jesus, the latter 
is still more so. It is for this reason that he im- 
mediately adds:—and will present us with 
you.—This must refer to a presentation before 
the judgment seat of Christ for the reception of 
the great prize (chap. i. 14; v. 10; comp. 2 
Tim. iv. 8; 2 Thess. ii. 19), or, which comes to 
the same result, a presentation of them as the 
companions of Christ in His kingdom. [This 
presentation by Christ is not the same with stand- 
ing before His bar for judgment. The Apostle 
has here no allusion to the more awful scenes of 
the last judgment (chap. v. 10) but only to the 
more animating presentation with Christ and 
by Christ for final acceptance by the Father]. 
Ver. 15. For all things are for your 
sakes.—This is immediately connected with the 
preceding phrase, in which he had declared that 
he would have fellowship with them in the future 
glory. The all things has reference to what he 
had said of his afflictions and his deliverances, 
of his faith and its fruits, and of his speaking 
and witnessing for the truth in the power of 
faith. In ver, 12 he had said that life was ener- 
gizing in them, and he now declares that all 
things he had mentioned (τὰ πάντα), would turn 
out for their good. (comp. chap. i. 6; Phil. i. 
25; 2 Tim. ii. 10). He will present us with 
you, for all these things take place for your 
sakes. In the final sentence he tells them of the 
ultimate result to which all things would be con- 
ducted:—in order that the grace which 
abounds through many, might multiply 
thanksgivings to the glory of God.—The 
grace (χάρις) is here not the whole salvation 
sealed by the resurrection of Christ, for such an 
idea would not be expressed by a phrase like τὰ 
πάντα, but the gracious assistance of which he 
had just spoken. (ver. 10 ff.). Πλεονάσασα διὰ 
τῶν πλειόνων signifies that the grace was in- 
creased or enlarged by the greater number of 
those who participate in it, or to whom it is ex- 
tended. The persons here spoken of are not 
those who would become interested in the bless- 
ing in consequence of the Corinthians’ interces- 
sions in his behalf, for his subject did not call for 
such an allusion (as in chap. i. 11). The same 
general sense of the passage would be gained if 
we should connect διὰ τῶν πλειόνων with the 
following mepicceton: —that the abounding 
grace might multiply the thanksgivings 
by means of many.—lIn this case the in- 
creased number, who participated in the blessing, 
were those through whom the grace, extended 
or enlarged by their participation, would be the 
means of a more abundant thanksgiving. This 


78 





is certainly better than passing over the inter- 
vening τῶν πλειόνων, to govern τὴν ἐν χαριστίαν by 
διά (in which case the genitive would have been 
more grammatical; comp. chap. ix. 12), and to 
take περισσεύσῃ in an intransitive sense. The 
word, however, is frequently used in either a 
transitive or an intransitive signification; comp. 
ix. 8,12. On the phrase, to the glory of God, 
comp. 1 Cor. x. 31. [Alford presents us with 
four ways of translating this clause: 1. ‘that 
grace having abounded by means of the greater 
number (who have received it), may.multiply the 
thanksgiving to the glory of God;” 2. ‘that 
grace having abounded, may, on account of the 
thanksgiving of the greater number, be multi- 
plied to the glory of God.” (Luruer, Benget, 
etc.); 8. ‘that grace having abounded, may, by 
means of the greater number, multiply the 
thanksgiving to the glory of God.” (De Wxrre); 
4. “that grace having multiplied by means of 
the greater number, the thanksgiving may 
abound to the glory of God.” (Proposed as pos- 
sible, but not adopted by himself). He prefers 
the first as ‘‘most agreeable to the position of 
the words and to the emphasis.’’] 

Vers, 16-18. For which cause we faint 
not.=<Avé refers back to ver. 14. (ver. 15 was 
only’an explanation of ver. 14). We faint not 
(οὐκ ἐκκακοῦμεν) occurs here in the same sense as 
in ver. 1. In positive contrast with this, he 
says:—but even if our outward man is 
wasted away, our inward (man) is never- 
theless renewed day by day.—The outward 
man (Ὁ ἔξω dvdpwroc), is an expression found 
only in this place, and it denotes the whole per- 
sonal existence, so far as it is embodied in na- 
ture and the laws of the external common life. 
On the other hand, ὁ ἔσωϑεν ἄνϑρ. denotes the 
same personal existence, so far as it is deter- 
mined by the Divine law, and participates in 
the fulness of the Divine life. Comp. Rom. vii. 
22; comp. 23 (where νοῦς is an equivalent word) : 
Eph. iii. 16 comp. 19. (Brox, Seeleni., 68 f. comp. 
42,37). Meyer thinks the former expression 
denotes that which is visible in us, 7. ¢., our cor- 
poreal nature, and the latter, our intellectual, 
rational and moral selves. Osiander under- 
stands by the latter term, the essential nature 
of man, kindred with God and capable of rege- 
neration. [Hopae: ‘man’s higher nature—his 
soul as the subject of the Divine life.”’] Comp. 
Devirzscu, Bibl. Psychol., pp. 145 f. 331, 333. 
[Alford, Stanley, Barnes and Bloomfield under- 
stand by it simply the soul in distinction from 
the body]. The doctrine of Collenbusch and 
Menken, that the inner man is an invisible body, 
existing in some concealed form within us, can- 
not be sustained by any natural exegesis, or by 
the plain meaning of these words. The attempt 
which Osiander has made to devise an interme- 
diate doctrine according to which the inner man 
is the sphere of the higher spiritual life, which, 
however, communicates itself to the whole man 
by perpetually acting in an outward direction, 
and which, therefore, contains the germ of a 
higher bodily life and of ἃ corporeal resurrec- 
tion, is certainly problematical. The wasting 
away (διαφϑείρεσϑαιν of our outer man, ὁ. e., the 
destruction of the outer man by the consuming, 
fretting, and disintegrating conflicts which his 





4} δ. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





sufferings involved, is here alluded to as an ac 
tual process in the εἰ καί (which cannot mean: 
even supposing that. Riickert), and was an ac- 
tual fact of the Apostle’s experience, notwith- 
standing the salvation asserted in ver. 10f. In 
contrast with this perishing of the outer, he now 
places the renewal (ἀνακαινοῦσϑαι) of the inner 
man. NEANDER: ‘‘the ἀνά presupposes an ori- 
ginal image of God in man.” Both processes 
are represented as perpetually going on, but the 
inward man is said to be continually endued 
with new power, 7. e., to be renewed, and sus- 
tained by the quickening Spirit (πνεῦμα ζωοποιοῦν) 
which came to him from Christ. (chap. iii. 
17 f. and ver. 6). Ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἡμέρᾳ is like the 
Hebr. Dj) Dj), Ps. Ixviii. 20; Gen. xxxix. 10; 
Esther 111. 4). The second ἀλλά is equivalent 
to: yet, nevertheless, as is frequently the case 
in hypothetical conclusions in which the apodo- 
sis contains a contrast to the protasis. (comp. 
chap. v. 16; xi. 6; xiii. 4; 1 Cor. iv. 15; ix. 2). 
—For our light affliction which is but for 
a moment, worketh for us exceeding 
abundantly, an eternal weight of glory. 
(Ver. 17).—He here notices what it was which 
gave such continual refreshment to his inward 
man, under the exhausting influence of his suffer- 
ings. It was the hope of glory with which the 
Spirit of Christ had inspired him, and which show 

ed him that these suffering were only the momen- 
tary and slight inconveniences of a transition 
state, and the necessary means of attaining a state 
of glory. (Comp. ver. 14; Rom. v. 6; viii. 17 ff.). 
Inasmuch as this view of his sufferings contained 
the reason for the renewal of which he had spo- 
ken (ἀνακαίνωσις), he introduces it with a γάρ. 
The verse contains a sharp antithesis. There is 
on the one hand τὸ παραυτίκα ἐλαφρὺν τῆς ϑλίψεως, 
the momentary* (coming and going in a moment) 
lightness (in respect to weight and therefore 
easily to be borne) of the affliction (an oxymo- 
ron, since ϑλύψις, oppression, implies something 
heavy), and on the other, the eternal weight of 

glory (τὸ αἰώνιον βάρος δόξης). Βάρος signifies 
weight, and therefore pressure, and would 
seem more appropriately connected with the 
affliction (ϑλύψες), but is here applied to the glory 
(δόξα) on account of the great extent or high 
degree of the glory. The meaning is: the afilic- 





* [Bloomfield notices that the natural meaning of wapav- 
τίκα (παρ᾽ at, ind αὐτίκα present) is “at present,’ and that 
the Syriac translators and most recent commentators there- 
fore assign to the passage the sense of: “our present light 
affliction.’ But the ancients generally, and almost all the 
earlier moderns took παραυτίκα to mean momentary. The 
idea, “for the present,” readily suggests the notion of what 
is temporary, and such a version seems required by the an- 
tithetical αἰώνιον. Chrysostom’s observations on this pas- 
sage are admirable: ‘The Apostle opposes things present te 
things future: a moment to eternity; lightness to weight; 
affliction to glory. Nor is he satisfied with this. but he adds 
another word and doubles it, saying, καθ᾽ ὑπερβ. eis ὑπερβ. 
This isa magnitude excessively exceeding. The repetition 


is intensive, after the Heb. IND ΝΟΣ exceedingly.” 


Dr. A. Clarke says: “it is every where visible what influ- 
ence St. Paul’s Hebrew had on his Greek: 75 signifies 
= - 


to be heavy and to be glorious: the Apostle in his Greek 
unites these two significations, and says, “ weight of glory.” - 
Comp. Hodge. Barrow has two passages finely illustrating 
this favorite text of his, in Sermm. 4th and 40th (Works by 
Hamilton Vol. I. pp. 38 and 384). Also Bp. J. Taylor, Com 
temp. on the State of Man, Lib. ii. chap. 1.1. 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 79 





tion is soon over and light, while the glory is 
everlasting and weighty. Possibly the affliction 
was called momentary on account of the near- 
ness of Christ’s second coming, 7. 6. the Parousia 
(Meyer). Certainly the everlasting duration 
and the magnitude of the glory, when contem- 
plated by a steady eye of faith, would make 
afflictions seem but momentary and light.—But 
we must understand the Apostle as implying that 
the afflictions are the actual cause of the glory. 
The ϑλίψις is the means of producing and bring- 
ing to pass the δόξα, i. 6. the glory of the hea- 
venly kingdom. This is a consequence of that. 
What is represented in other passages as a re- 
ward (com. Matth. v.10; Luke xvi. 25; Rom. 
viii. 27; 2 Tim. ii. 12; Rom. v. 2-5), is here re- 
presented as a natural result. The affliction so 
exercises and purifies the believer, that he is 
qualified to enjoy the glory, or, it promotes the 
sanctification of both soul and body. Nothing 
is said, however, to imply that the sufferings 
have any merit in themselves, or have any in- 
trinsic value in the matter of our justification.— 
The qualification cad’ ὑπερβολήν εἰς ὑπερβολήν 
does not seem applicable to αἰώνιον, and it must 
therefore be connected with κατεργάζεται; they 
work in a superabundant manner, even to a 
superfluity. Meyer explains it as: the measure- 
less energy and the measureless results of the 
working (κατεργάζεται, comp. chap. i. 8; x. 15; 
1 Cor. xii. 81; Gal. i. 18; Rom. vii. 13, et ai.). 
It may then be indirectly connected with the 
δόξα (Osiander). A separation of the words so 
as to make the first caW’ ὑπερ, have reference to 
τῆς ϑλίψεως (the exceedingly intense affliction), 
and the second εἰς ὑπερβ. to the δόξαν (Bengel) is 
not sustained by grammatical usage.—Such an 
accumulation of epithets indicates the highest 
possible degree, but not a development of the 
glory from one super-eminent position of glory to 
another still higher. In ver. 18 he notices still 
further the subjective reason for such a result: 
while we look not at the things-which are seen, 
but at the things which are not seen. To take 
this in the sense of something which must be 
presupposed as a condition to what had just 
been said, is not called for, since the Apostle in 
the context is not exhorting his readers, but is 
simply describing a fact, and ἡμῶν can be taken 
only by way of application to a more extensive 
class (to believers generally). Σκοπεῖν is: to 
take in sight, particularly to look upon the ob- 
ject of our exertion, as in Phil. ii. 4. The things 
which are seen (τὰ βλεπόμενα) are the blessings 
of the αἰὼν οὗτος, the things we perceive by our 
senses; the things not seen (τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα) 
are those of the ἄευν μέλλων, things which are 


beyond the perception of our senses, and yet | 


not precisely the same as the ἀόρατα (invisible 
things). BrnGEeL says: ‘many things which 
are at present unseen, will be visible when faith’s 
journey is accomplished.” The μὴ in connec- 
tion with μὴ σκοπούντων ἡμῶν describes the sub- 
jective position in which believers are supposed 
to be (Winer*).—For the things which are 





[* What the author alludes to here is expressed in Winer 
(Gram. ? 59, Andover ed. p. 366): “Of the negative particles 
ov stands when the intention is to represent something 
exactly and directly (as a reality), μὴ stands where some- 
thing is only conceived of (according to the idea) in the 











seen are temporary, but the things which 
are not seen are eternal (ver. 18).—He here 
gives the reason for the not looking at, etc., 
πρόςκαιρα (temporary), is applicable to a definite 
period of time, that which continues only for a 
limited season, and hence means not so much 
temporal as transitory. It occurs also in Matth. 
xiii. 21; Mark iv. 17; Heb. xi. 25. 


CHAPTER V. 


Ver. 1. For we know that if the earthly 
house of this tabernacle were dissolved. 
—We have here the reasons assigned for what 
had been said in chap. iv. 17: ‘‘ We have said 
that our temporal afflictions worked for us an 
eternal weight of glory, and the reason is, we 
know,” etc. Or, it will come to the same end, if 
we take the idea thus: Our afflictions accomplish 
the result we have mentioned; for we have, as 
we know, etc. Οἴδαμεν, “we,” ὦ. e., the Apostle 
and his companions ‘‘ know,”’ for there is no ap- 
peal here to the general consciousness of men, as 
in some other places. ’Eav expresses the possible 
occurrence of an event, the actual occurrence of 
which he leavyesto the future to determine. This 
event is his not living until the Parousia, the 
second coming of Christ. It was the death of his 
present body, here figuratively called the destruc- 
tion of his earthly tabernacle. Tov σκήνους is here 
the genitive of apposition, for the house was the 
same as the (well-known) tabernacle. The body 
is thus described as a dwelling of the spirit 
which is easily broken up. There is no allusion, 
however, to the tent habitations of the Israelites 
in the wilderness, or the tabernacle of witness 
there. In the same way we’ have σκήνωμα in 2 
Pet. i. 13 f. The word σκῆνος (tent) was fre- 
quently used among the Greeks for the earthly 
habitation or covering of the soul, but invariably 
with reference to the earthly body, and always 
with some allusion to the fundamental notion of 
a temporary tent. (Meyer).* ᾿Ἐπιγέιος, as in 1 
Cor. xv. 40, means that which is onearth. [Sran- 





mind; the former is the objective. the latter the subjective 
negation. This usage, he thirks, is uniform, especially in 
the New Testament. Thus he points out that in our pas- 
sage τὰ μὴ βλεπ. signifies the mere idea of what cannot be 
seen, while in Heb. xi: 1, τὰ οὐ βλεπ. signifies what actually 
is not seen. (Idd. p. 370), Stanley, on the other hand, thinks 
that the only reason why μὴ is used in this passage and ot 
in Heb. xi. 1, is ‘merely from the Greek usage, which re- 
quires μὴ after the article, and ov where the article is not 
used.” Alford thinks that μὴ is used here only to express 
what is hypothetical: “on the supposition that,” etc. There 
can be no question that in these two passages Winer’s view 
throws light and beauty over the thought. Faith (in Heb. 
xi. 1) looks to that which is beyond the reach of bodily sight 
and (in 2 Cor. iv.18) turns away so as not to look upon what 
might be seen.] 


[* Stanley suggests that the mingling of the metaphors of 
atent and a garment may have been caused by Paul's fa- 
mniliarity with the Cilician materials used in tent making. 
Sometimes these were of skins, which Wetstein thinks were 
suggestive also of the human body, often called by the 
Greeks a tent; and sometimes they were of hair cloth, which 
was almost equally suggestive of a habitation and of a ves- 
ture. When ‘such tents were separated into their parts 
(καταλυθῇ), if they were not strictly dissolved (Stanley 
they were at least taken down and made away with (Alford). 
Chrysostom says that “by these means Paul shows how 
superior future things were to the present. For to the 
ἐπίγειον he opposes the οὐρανίαν. and to the οἰκίαν τοῦ 
σκήνους, which was easy to be dissolved and was made for 
the present occasion, he opposes the αἰώνιαν; for the name 
of tent often indicated something only for a special emer 
gency; hence Juno. xiv. 2.”] 


80 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





LEy: “ἐπὶ not of but upon the earth (comp. 1 
Cor. xv. 40), opposed to ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς and εξ 
οὐρανοῦ". In case this earthly habitation, 
which was given him only for a time, should be 
destroyed, he expresses his certain assurance 
that we have a building (which is) from God— 
a dwelling not made by hands, eternal, 
in the heavens.—The words ἐκ Veov are not 
to be joined with ἔχομεν, as if we received it from 
God, and yet the dwelling was said to be of a 
directly Divine origin. This is said in the 
highest sense, as if it were the result of an im- 
mediate Divine agency ( 1 Cor. xv. 88); and was 
not like the present body, merely of a general 
Divine origin (1 Cor. xii. 18-24). In this re- 
spect it was like the heavenly city of which it is 
said that its builder and maker is God. Heb. xi. 
10. But this building (οἰκοδομή) is not the city 
of God nor the house of the Father, Jno. xiv. 3 
(in which case the phrase: our earthly dwelling 
of this tabernacle, would imply that the earth 
itself is a transient place of residence), but the 
resurrection body, the result of a new Divine 
creation. This is still further defined as an 
house not made by hands (οἰκία ayeporoinroc). 
In this expression, the lower human origin is 
denied, but in a way corresponding to the figure 
and not to the thing spoken of. It is not needful 
here to recur to the original formation of the 
body in Gen. ii. 7-21. Neanprr: “He is here 
speaking of a higher heavenly organ to contain 
the soul, instead of the earthly body.” [‘The 
use of αἰώνιος (comp. chap. iv. 1 ff.) forbids us 
to understand by the oixia, a temporary lodgment 
of the soul, to be succeeded by the glorified body 
at the resurrection. It must mean a permanent 
spiritual corporeity (so to speak) capable of co- 
existing with the body of the resurrection. It is 
something which is not the soul, but essential to 
its perfect consciousness of personality and iden- 
tity. The human being, it is probable, cannot 
exist as pure spirit. A vehicle or form, perhaps 
an organization, may be necessary to its action. 
(See Taylor’s Physical Theory of Another Life, 
chap. i.). Hence the use of the varied terms 
οἰκοδομὴ, οἰκία, οἰκητήριον: also the expressions 
ἐπενδύσ. ἐνδυσάμ. and the deprecatory language 
of ver. 8, and ἐπειδὴ---ἐπενδ, ver. 4.”—WEBSTER 
and Witkinson]. But this dwelling is said to be 
eternal in contrast with the dwelling of this ta- 
bernacle. [In our English version a comma 
should separate “eternal” and ‘inthe heavens.” 
Fausset]. The last qualification, ἐν τοῖς ovpa- 
voic (opp. ἐπίγειος) should be joined with ἔχομεν, 
so as to say that we have this dwelling in the 
heavens. But how is this to be understood? 
The present tense would seem to refer to some 
period immediately after death. But if the soul 
is to have a body corresponding to its condition 
at that time (of which, to say the ieast, the 
Scriptures distinctly say nothing), then the 
dwelling here mentioned cannot be eternal. Nor 
would what is said in ver. 2 of our house which 
is from heaven, agree very well with such an 
assertion. Comp. Delitzsch, Psychol. p.374 ff. It 
is possible indeed that ἔχομεν refers to a mere re- 
version or expectancy, ¢. ¢., to an ideal possession 
like that which is spoken of when it is said: Thou 
shalt have treasure in heaven (Luke xviii. 22). 
In such a case the dwelling would merely be se- 








cured for believers, just as the life mentioned in 
Col. iii. 8 (comp. i. 5, and the crown of righte- 
ousness in 2 Tim. iv. 8) is said to be. Or it may 
be alleged that the intermediate state between 
death and the resurrection is entirely lost sight 
of in the Apostle’s mind, inasmuch as we know 
that he looked upon it as altogether temporary, 
and hence that the perfection to be attained after 
the resurrection was the absorbing object of his 
attention in this passage (Osiander). Itis hardly 
probable that such a man would haye changed 
his mind so soon after writing the fifteenth chap- 
ter of his former Epistle to the Corinthians, and 
so should now have believed that he was to pass 
immediately at death into the blessedness of the 
resurrection body. And yet how can we recon- 
cile what is here said with what is said in that 
chapter respecting the development of the resur- 
rection body out of the earthly? It was doubt- 
less his deliberate conviction that in the Parousia, 
when our Lord shall return, the heavenly bodies 
prepared for all who belong to Christ, shall be 
brought down to this earth, and a power shall 
be imparted to those then alive of changing, 
and to those then deceased of uniting with, the 
essential germs of their bodies, and that these 
shall thus attain their proper fulness and form. 
Neanper: ‘There is certainly a marked distine- 
tion between what Paul here says and what he 
had taught in his earlier Epistles. During that 
earlier period his most ardent thoughts had been 
directed to the second coming of Christ. Now, 
however, when he was oppressed by apprehen- 
sions of death (chap. iv. 10-12), his mind was 
more impressed with the feeling that he might 
not live to see this second coming of Christ. In 
this state of mind he had new and additional dis- 
coveries of Divine truth on this subject, either 
by means of his own reflections under the direc- 
tion of the Holy Ghost, or by means of direct 
revelations from heaven. From the promises of 
Christ, and from the very nature of fellowship 
with Christ, he was now satisfied that death 
would be only a progress toward a higher state 
of existence, and this thought had heen developed 
into a conviction that the soul must come into 
possession of an organ adapted to the active con~ 
scious life immediately after death.”’* 


[ Dr. Hodge has recently very elaborately defended the 
interpretation which makes the house not made with hands 
to be heaven itself. Im this he agrees substantially with 
Anselm, Aquinas and Rosenmueller. His arguments are 
(1), the frequent Scriptural comparison of heaven to a house 
in which are many mansions (Jno. xiy. 2), a city. in which 
are many houses (Heb. xi. 10, 14; xiii. 14; Rey. xxi. 10), or 
more generally a habitation (Luke xvi. 9); (2), the appro- 
priateness of the metaphor; (8). the agreement of the de- 
scription here given with other descriptions of heaven. Heb, 
xi. 10 (comp. Heb. ix. 11), et. al.; (4), any body after death 
or in the resurrection could not be spoken of as at present 
in the heavens, or as to be received from heaven: whereas 
Christ expressly authorizes such language respecting the 
mansions He is preparing; (5), the building here spoken of 
is evidently to be entered upon at death. When Paul died 
this was to save him from being found naked, and this could 
not be at the final resurrection; (6), believers are said to 
pass immediately into glory at death (Matth. xxii. 82; Luke 
xvi. 22; xxiii. 43; Phil. i. 22 f.; Heb. xii. 28). In favor of 


| the common view, which makes the house not made by 


hands the same as the body to he received at the general 
resurrection, it is alleged (1), that as the earthly house of 
this tabernacle is a body, the heavenly house must be a 
body also. Paul’s object was not to inform his readers that 
he expected a new place of residence or to be in heaven, but 
that he looked for something in the place of his present 
corporeal tenement; (2), the building was not to be heaven, 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 


81 


——— eee '>”MROO13 00-9 


Vers. 2-4.—For in this also we groan— 
easnestly desiring to put on over it our 
house which is from heaven:—We have 
here one proof or sign that what he had asserted 
in ver. 1 was areality. This proof was the fact 
that even while we remain in our earthly bodies 
we have an intense longing for a house from 
heaven. Ἔν τοὐτῷ has here not the sense of 
therefore, on this account, as in John xvi. 30, as 
if the succeeding participial sentence were merely 
an exposition of the previous verse; nor is its 
object simply to explain what was meant in ver. 
1 by the dissolution of the earthly habitation. It 
rather refers (comp. ver. 4, we who are in this ta- 
bernacle) to the tabernacle (σκῆνος) of ver. 1, and 
presents a contrast to the supposition there made 
that it might be dissolved. The accent, there- 
fore, should be placed upon év; and καὶ should be 
looked upon as belonging to it. The sense 
would then be: we know this to be so, and the 
proof of it is in the fact, that even now in these 
bodies also we show our longings after the object 
of that confidence by our sighs.—A similar style 
of argument may be found in Rom. viii. 22 f. 
The earnest desire here spoken of gives us the 
true reason for the sighing. That which he had 
called in ver. 1 a building from God, a house 
which we have in heaven, he here calls a habita- 
tion from heaven (οἰκητήριον ἐξ οὐρανοῦ) not merely 
on account of its origin, but because it was ac- 
tually to come down from heaven to earth. 
Οἰκία is somewhat more absolute, whereas 
οἰκητήριον, a domicile, expresses its proper rela- 
tion to the inhabitant (Bengel).—’'Erevdioacta 
(to superimpose, to put on over, in which he 
passes to the figure of a garment) is not a putting 
on of one garment after another has been laid 
aside, but a putting on of one garment over ano- 
ther, comp. ver. 4. The longing is for a trans- 
formation in which the earthly body will not be 
laid aside (in death), but the heavenly will be 
thrown over it. The idea is that of a new embo- 
diment without a destruction of the corporeal 
system which had been possessed on earth. [‘‘The 
expression τὸ ἐξ ovp. compared with ἐκ θεοῦ ἔχο- 
μὲν and ἐν τοῖς οὐρ. sufficiently distinguishes the 
οἰκητήριον spoken of from the resuscitated body.” 
Wes. and Witx.|—Since, in fact being 


but it was then 7m the heavens, and was to be received from 
heaven, (8), the reason why the Apostle did not especially 
refer to the intermediate state between death and the 
Parousia, was that he had yet received no revelation on the 
point whether he and his fellow-Christians of that age 
would live until the Parousia, and so whether there should 
be any such state to those of whom he was speaking: (4), in 


contrast with ἐνδύω in this conection ἐπενδύω must have a | 


special meaning which it need not have in 1 Cor. xv. 53 f. 
for it seems to have the idea of an investiture over the whole 
person and state of the individual, and not that of a general 
inhabitation of a people. In spite of the obvious difficulty 
that Paul seems to speak of receiving the investiture at 
death, or at least to regard it as ideally at hand when he 
should die, we cannot but regard these arguments as con- 
clusive in favor of the common interpretation. Neither 
Calvin nor Olshausen advocated the idea (sometimes imputed 
to them and here avowed by Neander) of a body prepared 
for the soul at death and to be inhabited until the Parousia. 
The spiritual interpretation that the building to be received 
from heaven is the glory of Christ’s righteousness, needs no 
refutation. It cannot be denied that Paul was familiar with 
the Rabbinic fancy, that “ Adam lost the image of God by 
his fall, and so became naked.” In the Synop. Sohar, it is 
said that “when the time draws near in which man is to 
depart from this world, the angel of death takes off this 
mortal garment and clothes him with one from Paradise.” 
We cannot. however suppose that Paul was much influenced 
by such prevalent opinions,| 





clothed, we shall not be found naked. 
(Vr.3). We have here acruzx interpretum. If we 
adopt the two readings, εἴπερ---ἐκδυσαμενοι, we 
shall have a natural meaning by giving to εἴπερ 
the sense of: although, albeit; in which case the 
idea would be: although we may be unclothed, 
(dead), we shall not be found naked, @. e., with- 
out a body ; for we shall be clothed with a resur- 
rection body. With the reading ἐνδυσάμενοι we 
obtain the same general idea, if we contrast that 
word with ἐπενδύσασϑαι, and regard it as the 
putting on of the resurrection body: If indeed 
we shall be found clothed and not naked (Flatt). 
Such a method, however, would be of very doubt- 
ful propriety. But it would be quite unallowa- 
ble to interpret écye as a concessive particle, or 
to concede no force to the ye, as if the word were 
equivalent to εἰ καί. Fritzsche regards évdvodue- 
vot as having the same force as éxevdvo., and εἴγε 
the sense of quandoquidem, and he then looks 
upon this verse as giving a reason for the longing 
mentioned in ver. 2: since we shall attain the 
possession of our imperishable bodies just as well 
by putting on our immortal bodies when we shall 
be alive, as by putting them on after we have laid 
aside our earthly bodies (7. ¢., in consequence of 
death and the resurrection, 1 Cor. xv. 52). Such 
an announcement would be grammatically ap- 
propriate, but 1, such a use of ἐνδυσάμενοι in 
connection with ἐπενδύσασϑαι before and after it, 
vers. 2, 4, is not very probable; and 2, the re- 
mark itself seems so self-evident and trivial, that 
it would be unworthy of the Apostle. But Riick- 
ert’s interpretation: ‘‘as it is certain that we 
shall not be without a body (ἐκδυσάμενοι) after 
death,” breaks up the logical train of thought, 
and with many the assertion thus made would 
not be looked upon as quite certain from the 
Scriptures. Meyer (who adopts the readings of 
the Ree. é:ye—évdve.) thinks that the Apostle has 
reference occasionally in this argument to those 
who denied a future resurrection (1 Cor. xv.), for 
otherwise he cannot account for the insertion of 
ver. 8. He thinks the Apostle intends to assert 
here his belief, his absolute certainty (εἴγε) that 
not only those Christians who shall finally be 
changed, but those who shall then be raised from 
the dead, shall meet the Lord at His second 
coming not destitute of bodies (γυμνοί), but pro- 
vided with corporeal coverings: ‘‘we have these 
longings ({. e., for the ἐπενδυσασϑαι, ver. 2) on 
the presumption that, being clothed, we shall not 
be found naked (écye has the sense of: if indeed, 
or if so be, implying a certainty, not by the force 
of the particle itself, but in consequence of the 
connection of the idea and the tenor of Paul’s 
discourse). Kaz would also have in this case the 
sense of: *‘truly.”* ᾿Ενδυσάμενοι would denote an 





ΓΞ Hermann (ad Viger. p. 834) expounds the difference be 
tween the two particles thus: “Εἴπερ corresponds to the 
Germ. wenn anders (provided that) and εἴγε to the Germ. 
wenn denn (since). The former is used of a thing which is 
assumed to be, but the writer leaves it in uncertainty whe. 
ther it is so or not, while the latter, on the other hand, is 
used of that which is correctly assumed to be.” NEANDER 
says that “in the later Greek this distinction was not al- 
ways observed, since the words were not unfrequently used 
in each other’s place.” For Paul’s disregard of the distinc- 
tion, Dr. Hodge appeals to 1 Cor. viii. 5; Gal. iii. 4; Col. i. 23; 
2 Thess. i.6. The Apostle had no doubt about his ἐνδυσασ- 
θαι) and we therefore incline to think he must have used 
εἴγε. This suits the general tone of confidence which runs 
through the passage. If the other word was used, it must 
have been because he conceded something either ironically 


act which had taken place before the εὑρεϑησόμεϑα, 
and it is therefore an aorist participle. Suchan 
interpretation has nothing grammatically against 
it. Bfita reference to the deniers of the doc- 
trine of the resurrection cannot be presupposed 
without a high degree of improbability, and as 
the whole interpretation becomes feeble and 
forced without such a reference, it must there- 
fore bé considered very doubtful. It is still more 
difficult to agree with de Wette, who thinks the 
idea of the passage is: as we confidently expect 
that our heavenly house will also be a body. 
For it is evident from the words themselves that 
those who are ἐνδυσάμενοι are not γυμνοί; but if 
the idea of the body had been prominent, γυμνοί 
would have been followed by σώματος. NEAN- 
per: “We take these words in connection with 
those which precede them as merely an inciden- 
talexpression: we are passing on with believing 
confidence to a higher state of being, for we shall 
in no eyent be destitute of a higher organ when 
we lay aside our earthly body; and it is only to 
this necessity of laying aside our earthly body 
that our natures now feel such a repugnance.”’— 
As the participle is really in the aorist and yet 
must in such a case have the sense of the perfect 
ἐνδεδυμένοι, there are strong reasons against re- 
ferring ἐνδυσάμενοι and ov γυμνοί exclusively to 
those who shall be alive and clothed in earthly 
bodies when Christ shall appear in the Parousia 
(Grotius: if we shall be found among the 
changed, and not among the dead). Finding all 
these interpretations unsatisfactory, Osiander 
gives in his adherence to the figurative meaning 
which had been proposed by many ancient and 
some modern commentators. Thus Chrysostom 
et al. have γυμνοί δόξης; Ustert: ‘‘under the 
presumption that we are clothed, we shall not be 
found naked in a different sense, 7. e., without the 
crown for which we have struggled.” Ewa.p: 
‘‘criminally naked, as Adam and Eve were” 
(Gen. iii. 11). Others make out a similar mean- 
ing by taking ov γυμνοί as explanatory or epex- 
egetical of ἐνδυσάμενοι, and referring both words 
to Christ or the garment of his righteousness— 
an idea which Hoffmann (Schriftbeweis), following 
Anselm, understands of an ethical application of 
Christ. But neither the authorities which have 
been adduced for this, nor the arguments by 
which it has been’supported (as e.g. that it is an 
allusion to the secret Divine reasons or condi- 
tions in chap. iv. 14 ff., and an introduction to 
the mysteries of faith in ver. 14 ff.) are sufficient. 
to warrant such an explanation of ἐνδυσάμενοι and 
ov γυμνοί in this connection (where the figure of 
a garment is used in application to a new 
heavenly body), without the express addi- 
tion of some such word as Χριστοῦ or δόξης. 
We would prefer either to accede to Meyer’s 
interpretation, or to adopt the very well sus- 
tained and ancient reading εἴπερ---ἐκδυσάμευοι, 
giving ἔιπερ the sense of: although [i. 6., we 
earnestly desire to be clothed with our house 
from heaven, even if (or although) being un- 





or for the argument’s sake at the time. Καὶ connects with 
the previous clause, and may be rendered with either of the 
particles, “if in fact,” or “since in fact,” as in chap. iii. 6, 
and in ver. 5. A specimen of the same half doubt on a mat- 
by ny? certain to his own mind may be seen in Phil. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 











| 


| 


| 














clothed we shall not be found nak (comp 
Cor. viii. 5). Here, if anywhere in the explana 
tion of the Scriptures, we may be allowed + 
say: Won liquet.—In ver. 4 the assertion ip 
2 is again taken up, and is more particularly; - 
fined, and confirmed by reasons :—For we that 
are in this tabernacle do groan, being 
burdened.—The words οἱ ὄντες, being put at 
the head of thesentence for the sake of empha- 
sis, have the meaning of: we who are in earthly 
bodies, 7. e., while we are yet in them. The 
word βαρούμενοι, oppressed, feeling ourselves 
burdened, gives a reason for the groaning. 
BENGEL: “ἃ burden forces out sighs and 
groans.”’ This is to be referred partly to the 
oppressions caused by our earthly bodies (comp. 
Ecclus. ix. 15), and probably also partly to the 
sufferings which we have to endure while we 
are in them (but of which no mention is made in 
the context). ’Eg’ ᾧ would then have to bear 
the meaning of: wherefore (quare), and per- 
haps be equivalent to ἐπὶ τούτῳ 6—we sigh over 
that which, ete. This, however, could hardly 
be allowed, inasmuch as the earthly body would 
not then be the object which was to be clothed 
upon (ἐπενδύσασθαι) .--- Since we do not de- 
sire to be unclothed, but (we desire) to 
be clothed upon.—We may find a partial in- 
terpretation of this expression in what follows, 
which would incline us to make ἐφ᾽ ᾧ equivalent 
to because that (propterea quod), as in Rom. v. 
12 (not: in which, or although), and to refer it 
to the oppression which produces sighs on ac- 
count of the dread of death. And yet this natu- 
ral horror which all men feel in prospect of 
being unclothed, must be carefully distinguished 
from an unmanly fear of death, which would be 
unbecoming to the Apostle. The phrase ob ϑέλειν 
ἐκδύσασϑαι in the sense of: not wishing to die, is 
the more intelligible, since ‘the Apostle, per- 
haps, supposed that he might live till the time 
of Christ’s coming, and hence he might easily 
think of being spared the pains of death. (The 
word ἐκδύεσϑαι occurs in profane authors as a 
figurative expression for death. Comp. Wetstein 
on the passage). The reason why the Apostle 
wished to be clothed upon, is given in the final 
sentence:—that what is mortal might be 
swallowed up by life.—That which in 1 Cor. 
xv. 54 is expressed by a putting on of immorta- 
lity and a swallowing up of death, is here called 
a swallowing up of all that is mortalin us in the 
life, ὁ. e., in the new imperishable life which be- 
comes manifest when the body is changed, and 
its mortality is forever abolished. The earnest 
desire expressed in ver. 2 is again alluded to 
when it is said that they did not desire to be un- 
clothed; but when it is said that they were bur- 
dened (βαρούμενοι), the Apostle shows that a 
feeling of oppression is connected with it, inas- 
much as they might be called to encounter the 
dreaded process of being unclothed (ἐκδύσασθαι). 
And yet another way of construing it in which 
ἐφ᾽ q is taken in the sense of since, deserves the 
preference, inasmuch as it is not easy to see how 
the oppression caused by our present bodies, so 
much disturbed by sin and the many evils of our 
present lot, should make us long not to die, but 
to be changed. If it be said that it is precisely 
in death that the oppression of the tabernacle is 


| CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 


-΄ 


the greatest, inasmuch as it is then as it were 
breaking down over the head of the inhabitant 
(Osiander), we reply that tne expression: we 
th ' are in this tabernacle, seems to refer rather 
t .voubles to be encountered in the midst of our 
present earthly life. 

Ver. 5. Now he who has completely 
wrought us out for this self same thing is 
God.—[The δὲ here is transitional. The exalted 
expressions he had used were not made because 
of any thing in himself, or without-a deep foun- 
dation being laid in his renewed nature]. He 
traces all those things of which he had been 
speaking to a Divine origin. The self same 
thing (αὐτὸ τοῦτο) of which he speaks, was not 
the groaning of the previous verse (comp. Rom. 
viii. 23), as Bengel and Hoffmann contend it was, 
for this would compel us to distort the significa- 
tion of κατεργάζεσθαι so as to make it mean to 
impair by severe labor (to wear down), to break 
down the spirits and so to make one sigh over his 
bodily state and its troubles; the words rather re- 
fer to what he had just said about being clothed 
upon, that our mortal part might be swallowed up 
by the life. Tue meaning of the Apostle is: this 
longing to be clothed upon is not exclusively 
from an internal source, for it has a profound 
Divine origin. Κατεργάζεσϑαι means to work 
out, to finish, and so to make ready. [The pre- 
position κατὰ in composition often introduces the 
idea of completeness, as in καταρτίζω in 1 Pet. v. 
10. Our word also implies a powerful effort as 
if against opposition]. In no other place in the 
New Testament is it used with a personal object. 
It has reference not to the first or natural crea- 
tion, but as the further qualifying expression 
(who hath given us the Spirit) teaches us, to the 
Divine agency in man’s redemption; and it com- 
prehends that whole process of renovation and 
sanctification through which we attain and enjoy 
everlasting glory. But the actual entrance into 
this everlasting glory, the glorification itself, is 
accomplished, as the context informs us, by means 
of a transformation.—Who also hath given 
unto us the earnest of the Spirit.—If we 
adopt the reading of ὁ καὶ δόυς in the following 
clause, the καὶ will introduce another qualifica- 
tion, ὦ. 6. the warrant on which we expect a state 
of glorious perfection in the future world. But 
if we accept the reading ὁ δόυς merely, the sen- 
tence becomes an additional point, in the de- 
scription of Him who had wrought them; i. 6. 
‘cwho has given us the Spirit as an earnest.” 
The condition for which God had wrought them 
out, had already been described as one which was 
not in fact permanent. This temporary character 
is more distinctly brought forward in the word 
earnest (ἀῤῥαβῶνα comp. on chap.i 22). But the 
‘Spirit itself is the Divine principle by which they 
were thus wrought and prepared—the Divine 
Spirit who by the word and all means of grace 
enables us to attain everlasting glory (comp. 
chap. iv. 6, 17, 18; Eph. i. 18, 14; iv. 80, 31). 

Ver. 6-8. Therefore being always con- 
fident, and knowing whilst in our homein 
the body we are absent from our home in 
the Lord.—We have here an inference (οὖν) from 
what has been said in ver. 5, in reference espe- 
cially to his disposition or frame of mind. He was 
always confident (ver. 6), and he was willing to 











83 


ΕΞ---- 


be absent from the body (ver. 8). In consequence 
of this well-founded expectation that we shall be 
so gloriously perfected, we are willing, in spite of 
our reluctance to be unclothed, to be abseat from 
the body and to be present with the Lord (ver. 
8). This desire or willingness, however, is 
founded not merely upon the cheerful confidence 
in such a prospect, but also upon the knowledge 
which is expressed in ver. 6, viz., that while we 
are in our home, efc.). Butas this knowledge was 
itself founded upon a peculiar faith, the Apostle 
leaves the construction which he had commenced, 
that he might give the reason for this knowledge 
in an independent sentence (ver. 7). The asser- 
tion of his confidence (θαῤῥεῖν) is repeated in a 
new sentence, but not in a participial form, but 
in the first person of the Indicative. Originally 
he was ready to write: being therefore confident 
and knowing, ete., we are willing to be absent 
from the body, etc., but he was diverted from his 
train of thought by his desire to give a reason 
for this knowledge (ver. 7), so that the original 
sentence was left unfinished. The passage is 
therefore anacoluthic; and ver. 7 is not a paren- 
thesis (still less are vv. 7 and 8), but indispensa- 
ble to the argument. [Being therefore (in con- 
sequence of haying the earnest of the Spirit) 
always confident, and knowing by our walk of 
faith and not of sight, that while we are here in 
the body we must be absent from the Lord, we 
are well content to be absent from the body that 
we may be present with the Lord]. The word 
θαῤῥεῖν in its various forms occurs frequently in 
our Epistle, and is used also in Heb. xiii. 6; but 
the older form which predominates in the Gos- 
pels and the Acts is θαρσεῖν. It has the sense of, 
to be full of confidence and courage, to be cheer- 
ful and undismayed under disheartening circum- 
stances (comp. chap. iv. 8ff.; vi. 9,10; xii. 10). 
[Tyndale translates it: we are always of good 
cheere]. The word always (πάντοτε) does not ex- 
clude a variety of feelings in the frame of our 
minds, but only signifies that confidence is 
always predominant in our hearts (comp. Osian- 
der). The phrase καὶ εἰδότες is not of the same 
signification as καίπερ εἰδότες [even if, or although 
we know, efc.], nor should the sentence it in- 
troduces be understood as assigning a reason for 
the courage just expressed, but simply as intro- 


| ducing an additional thought. The substance of 


this knowledge was that their being at home in 
the body was the same thing as an absence from 
the Lord. He returns to the metaphor of a ha- 
bitation. The first expression (ἐνδημεῖν, etc.) 
was the same as to say: we are at home in our 
native place; the other was the same as, to tarry 
in a strange land, to be ina foreign country. To 
be at home in the body is to be abroad, or away 
from home with respect to the Lord. The words 
ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου are a pregnant expression for 
being away from the Lord. Or, as long as we 
have our home in the body, we cannot be with 
the Lord. The same general idea is brought 
out in Phil. i. 28; iii. 20, and 1 Thess. iv. 17 
(comp. Heb. xi. 13, and xiii. 14). He explains 
himself more fully [with respect to the nature of 
this ἐκδημοῦμεν) in ver. 7.—for we walk by 
faith and not by appearance.—The spheres 
in which we move are, that of faith (πίστις) on the 
one hand, and that of sight (εἶδος) on the other. 


84 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. fo 


SS a ΠΡ 


In that faith we have fellowship with the Lord 
(comp. Gal. iii. 27; Eph. iii. 17), but it is a veiled 
fellowship, in which Christ is beheld not imme- 
diately, but concealed in His heavenly glory. In 
another state of existence our Lord will permit 
His people to behold Him without obstruction, 
they shall be at home with Him, and they will 
participate in His glory (Rom. viii. 17; 1 Thess. 
iv. 17; John xvii. 24; Col. iii. 8, 4). The pre- 
position διὰ directs to the means: we walk by 
means of faith, Neander. [It generally denotes 
any attending circumstance or quality, particu- 
larly in a state of transition (Webster). Here 
the states themselves are named those of faith 
and appearance, because these are the prevailing 
guides, and we are passing through them]. The 
life on earth is a walk διὰ πίστεως, inasmuch as 
Christ having entered into His heavenly glory, 
is invisible to His people, their corporeal natures 
prevent them from beholding directly His hea- 
venly form, and they know the fact that he is 
glorified only by means of His word and their 
spiritual enjoyment of His power in their hearts 
(comp. Col. 111. 3; 1 Pet. i. 8; Rom. x. 14). 
’Lidoc does not signify either in classical or sacred 
writers (Luke iii. 22; ix. 29; John v. 27; and 
often in the Old Testament) the act of seeing or 
looking, but the form or prospect beheld (Hebr, 


"NI. ΠΝ). The meaning is: we are 
moving in the sphere of visible objects, where 
our senses have no perception of the form, or the 
actual appearance of Christ’s person. The ge- 
neral sense, however, of Luther’s translation, 
‘ein schauen,” [and of the authorized English 
version, ‘‘ by sight,”’] is correct. With reference 
to the contrast here, comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 12f. (where 
it is implied that the faith will, in a certain 
sense, continue even after the seeing has com- 
menced). The interpretation which represents 
ver. 7 as intended to give a reason for the con- 
fidence (Yappeiv), and which regards faith here 
as the certainty itself which we have with regard 
to the future and the supernatural world, and 
sight as the phenomenal world, ὁ, 6. those things 
which are present to our senses and are empiri- 
cally perceived, is certainly in opposition to 
grammatical usage and to the spirit of the con- 
text (comp. on the other hand Meyer and Osian- 
der). Inasmuch as this concealment of our Lord 
within His glory, and His consequent withdrawal 
from their immediate possession and enjoyment, 
might produce despondency on the part of His 
people, the Apostle proceeds in ver. 8 to say :— 
But (δέ is adversative) we are confident and 
are willing rather to leave our home in 
the body and to come to our home in the 


Lord.—tThe reason for this cheerful confidence’ 


is the same as that which had been assigned in 
ver. 6. But then from this confidence also, and 
from the consciousness of the insufficiency of 
the present life to afford us what we consider 
our supreme good, there springs up what he here 
connects with ϑαῤῥοῦμεν de, viz., the willingness 
rather to be from home, ete. Εὐδοκεῖν occurs also 
in 1 Cor, i. 21, and here means, to be satisfied that 
something should take place, and hence to wish, 
to long for it. The μᾶλλον (rather) should be 
connected with his absence, efc., so as to mean 
that he was willing rather to be absent, ete. The 








desire which he had expressed in ver. 4, had 
implied that he would prefer.to remain in the 
body (until the Parousia) rather than to be sepa- 
rated from it. In view of the confidence just 
expressed, and the consciousness that if he were 
present in the body he must be absent from the 
Lord, he now changes this desire into a longing 
(no longer a groaning and being burdened) 
rather to depart from the body, and hence to die 
(éxdteoda, ver. 4), and to be present with the 
Lord. ᾿Εκδημεῖν is the opposite of ἐνδημεῖν (ver. 
6), and hence is not merely a change of the body 
(ver. 4), but death. The words to be present 
with the Lord, have the same meaning as to be 
with Christ in Phil. i. 28, for there also it was 
necessary to die (ἀναλῦσαι) before he could be 
with Christ. Πρὸς τὸν κύριον is, in relation to 
the Lord, a pregnant expression, and it signifies: 
to depart, to go to another country, in order to 
be with Christ. He entertained the hope that 
immediately after death he would be in heaven 
with Christ. Such was the happy state which 
he expected in its perfection at the approaching 
Parousia. 

Vers. 9, 10.—Wherefore we make it our 
ambition that whether at hcme or absent 
from home we may be acceptable to Him. 
—The particle διό (wherefore) should be con- 
nected back with ver. 8 (εὐδοκοῦμεν). Wherefore, 
since we have such a desire, and in order that 
we may realize such a desire, we, etc. The verb 
φιλοτιμεῖσθαι signifies properly to love and seek 
for honor, to be ambitious; and with an infinitive, 
to strive after what one regards as his honor or 
reputation, and to give one’s self much trouble 
about it. It is used in the same way in Rom. xy. 
20 and 1 Thess. iv. 11. If in the phrases εἴτε 
ἐνδημοῦντες, εἴτε ἐκδημοῦντες, any thing is to be 
supplied, the two participles should be made to 
refer to the same noun; and of course this should 
be either the body (σῶμα), or the Lord (κέριος). 
The latter seems the most natural from the con- 
nection, but the former is probably allowable. 
As he had last spoken of an absence from the 
body, it is rather easiest to refer the absence 
here mentioned to the same object, and such a 
reference would control also the object of ἐνδημ. 
The reason that ἐνδημοῦντες is mentioned first ig 
most naturally explained by the fact that being 
acceptable to the Lord would of course be first 
thought of when speaking of one who was alive 
on earth, and would therefore be first sought af- 
ter by such a one (provided the participles are 
connected with the finite verb ¢cAoru., %. €., We 
strive, whether in or out of the body, ete.). But 
it must be remembered that éxdyu. from its pe- 
culiar signification (to leave a country, to set out 
on a journey) must refer not to the state after 
death, but to the very process of dying. And we 
may very well conceive that the Apostle might 
speak of a laboring to be acceptable to Christ, 
even in this act of dying, since the mind of a be- 
liever is supposed then to be active and to be 
striving to maintain its hold on Christ and to 
avoid whatever might displease Him. The idea 
is furthermore an important and an appropriate 
one; and we shall find it essentially the same, 
whether the participles are connected with 
φιλοτιμ. (see above), or with the infinitive sen- 
tence (¢. 6., we strive to be acceptable, whether 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 





we are in or out of the body.) [The sense of the 
passage is in fact virtually the same, whether 
these participles be joined with the body or with 
the Lord; for the Apostle assumes that an ab- 
sence from the one involves a presence with the 
other. Alford’s objection that we cannot be sup- 
posed to labor to be acceptable to Christ after or 
in death, since we are then saved, is of no great 
force, inasmuch as the labor is present in this 
life, that we may be acceptable after this life is 
closed]. In this way we are not obliged to de- 
part from the meaning which évdquety and ἐκδημεῖν 
has borne throughout this connection (together 
signifying thesameas πάντως or διὰ πάντος : wher- 
ever we may be, without regard to place), and 
with Meyer to take these words in their original 
meaning (analogous to that which they bear in 
1 Cor. v. 10; comp. vers. 6 and 7), without sup- 
plying any thing as understood. In ver. 10 the 
‘Apostle sets forth also the objective side of what 
he had said in ver. 9:—for we must all be 
made manifest before the judgment seat 
of Christ :—i. ¢., the reason why he so earnestly 
endeavored to please the Lord, was because he 
regarded this as his highest honor; or, (if we 
prefer to go further back), he shows how the ef- 
fort to please the Lord would spring from his de- 
sire to be present with the Lord (ver. 8). In 
other words, he here shows that such a desire 
could only be fulfilled by his being found ap- 
proved at that tribunal where he and his fellow 
believers were shortly to appear. The whole 
connection shows that by τοὺς πάντας ἡμᾶς he 
means not all mankind, but only all Christians. 
He enlarges upon this point, probably to excite 
his readers to diligence and to impress upon their 
minds the importance of laboring to be accepta- 
ble to Christ (ver. 9). Τοὺς πάντας makes the 
subject apply to the whole body of Christians. 
Neanver: “This is said with special emphasis 
in relation to the Corinthians, who were disposed 
to give judgment arrogantly against their fellow- 
men, without remembering how bad their own 
case was.” To be manifested (φανερωθῆναι) is not 
precisely equivalent to παραστῆναι (to be pre- 
sented, Rom. xiv. 10), for it looks to a complete 
manifestation of all that transpired within us or 
in the external life (comp. 1 Cor. iv. 5). Our 
Lord will show that He looks through every indi- 
vidual part as well as the whole body of His peo- 
ple. The words ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ βήματος (as in Rom. 
xiv. 10), are a solemn expression, and have a 
real significance; for if we ought not to make the 
tribunal of Christ merely a cloud, it certainly 
implies something more than a judicial inquiry 
with respect to each man immediately after death 
(Flatt), respecting which we have-no intimation 
elsewhere in Paul’s writings. [In classical Greek, 
βῆμα always signified, not ajudgment seat, but the 
raised place or step from which public speakers 
addressed the people at the great πανήγυρεις or 
other popular assemblies and courts of law. In 
the Sept. it still retained this signification (Neh. 
viil. 4; 2 Macc. xiii. 26). In Roman usage it 
passed from the tribune of the orator to the tri- 
bunal of the judge, which was an elevated seat 
on a lofty platform at one end of the Basilica in 
ν the forum. In the New Testament it always 
‘means (except in Acts viii. 5, where Luke gives 
( a meaning something like that of the classic 








85 


——— ον. 





Greek), a judgment seat where a formal trial is 
held, See Stanley’s note]. In 1 Cor. iv. 5 also, 
itis said that Christ will be our Judge, and in 
Rom. xiv. 10 [where the true reading is τοῦ ϑεοῦ] 
nothing inconsistent with this is necessarily im- 
plied, inasmuch as Christ is described as the re- 
presentative or the organ of the Father (comp. 
y. 22, 27;. Acts x. 42; xvii. 81; Rom. ii. 16). 
But the judicial office of Christ is perfectly con- 
sistent with His being the absolute revelation of 
God and the Redeemer of men.—The neces- 
sity of this judgment on the part of God is ex- 
pressed by dei: the only way to secure such a 
righteous retribution as would be honorable to 
God, is to have such a revelation of the hearts 
and conduct of us all. The object of this general 
manifestation was that all who were thus judged 
might be properly rewarded, and now in accord- 
ance with such a view he points each individual 
to his own particular interest in such a judgment 
(comp. Rom. xiv. 12):—that each one may 
receive the things done in his body.—The 
meaning of καμίζεσϑαι is, to bear away, to re- 
ceive; also, to bring back (for himself), to re- 
ceive again; and thus it signifiesa reward or re- 
compense. The moral actions of a man are 
something laid up with God in heaven, and must 
be received again in a corresponding retribution. 
Comp. Eph. vi. 8; Col. 111, 25. A similar idea is 
expressed by the figure of the sowing and reap- 
ing in Gal. vi. 7, and of the ϑησαυρίζειν in Matth. 
vi. 20 and 1 Tim. vi. 19. A fuller expression 
may be found in 1 Pet. i. 9; v. 4; 2 Pet. ii. 13. 
—The things given in this recompense are said 
to be τὰ διὰ τοῦ σώματος. The body to be received 
in the resurrection cannot be the one here in- 
tended [as if the Apostle would say: that each 
one may receive back thrqugh or by means of his 
(resurrection) body according to the things 
which he did. This view was much favored by 


' some ancient expositors (the Syrian, Tertullian, 
| Theodoret, Chrysostom and Oecumenius). It 


must be conceded that such a construction avoids 
some harshness, and Osiander seems inclined to 
favor it. He, however, concedes that it is diffi- 
cult to believe that the new body should be desig- 
nated by the simple word σῶμα] for that word 
is throughout our passage used for the earthly 
body. The word to be supplied is nat exactly 
πραχϑέντα, although this would be consistent 
with the proper sense of the passage, but ὄντα: 
that which took place by means of the body as an 
organ (comp. Plato: ἡδονῶν, ai διὰ τοῦ σώματός 
εἰσιν). Neander: while in this body. The 
reading of the Italic, the Vulgate and some other 
versions [: τὰ ἔδια τοῦ σώματος, propria, etc. } may 
have originated in a mistake, or τὰ διὰ τ. σ. may 
have seemed difficult of construction. Certainly 
τὰ διὰ is critically well authenticated—accord- 
ing to that he hath done, whether it be 
good or bad.—In this sentence πρός has refer. 
ence to the rule or standard according to which 
the reward is given. The ellipsis in eire—xaxdy 
must be supplied by a word from the relative 
sentence, viz., éxpagev.—lf the Apostle had his 
eye on some mongrel kind of Christianity, 
κομίσηται might imply that those who adhered to 
it would be excluded from the kingdom of God. 
But on the supposition that he was speaking of 
real Christians in the restricted sense, he must 


80 


have been distinguishing between different de- 
grees in their rewards according to the different 
degrees of fidelity on earth. Such distinctions 
are not inconsistent with the idea of a justifica- 
tion and salvation by grace; for in the economy 
of grace the law of righteousness prevails. Even 
if the atonement by Christ extends to the whole 
life of those who believe in Him, its influence 
upon individuals must be exerted by means of a 
progressive repentance (μετάνοια); and though 
they may be secured against condemnation, and 
though they may actually be saved, they may yet 
have their gracious reward diminished in pro- 
portion to their want of faithfulness. Such a 
humiliation will be as nothing in comparison with 
the gratitude they will feel for a salvation which 
will be greater in proportion as they recognize 
it as a free gift of grace (comp. Meyer and Osi- 
ander on ver. 10). 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. It is a fundamental law of the Divine king- 
dom and the leading aim of the faith by which 
it is implanted in the heart, that man the crea- 
ture should be seen and known as the feeble and 
powerless, and God as the only mighty one. 
Hence it is that those whom God makes use of 
for the advancement of His kingdom and His 
cause must sometimes experience much infirmity 
of body and of spirit, that all may see that God 
alone is strong, faithful and wise, and that He 
will help through every trial, and never will for- 
sake his people. He brings salvation and deli- 
verance when all hope has failed; He manifests 
the power of a divine life when nothing but 
death is anticipated, because while death with 
its distresses and infirmities is seen working in 
them, that life exhibits all its energies in those 
who receive it. Thus while the work of grace is 
witnessed in many and is accomplished in many 
by such means, abundant thanksgivings redound 
to that God who achieves such results. In 
this way they are never left without courage 
under the greatest difficulties, for though the 
outward man may waste away, the inward spirit 
is endowed with ever freshening energies. Then 
while their eye is directed steadily to the things 
which are unseen and eternal, and to those hea- 
venly glories which God has promised His peo- 
ple, they are taught by the spirit of humble 
faith to speak and to confess Christ before men 
with cheerfulness, and to regard their trials in 
a very different light from that in which the eye 
of sense perceives them. Those trials seem ex- 
ceedingly light and transitory compared with 
the eternal weight of glory, for which God is 
preparing them even by such means, and for 
which no suffering can be properly endured here 
without fruit there. (comp. Heb. xii. 11), 

2. The sure hope of eternal life and the expec- 
tation of a perfect bodily nature, must make the 
Christian breathe forth many a longing sigh 
while he remains in this mortal body; and the 
horror whic! nature feels in prospect of the vio- 
lent dissolution of its corporeal life, must awaken 
in him a desire to eseape the dying process and 
to be clothed with a glorious life by an immedi- 
ate transformation; bnt such a hope will teach 
him also to be of good courage under all his 











THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
ee a 6. -- ἡ. -- ----- 





trials. Yet this courage arising from the hope 
of future glory on the one hand, and the con- 
sciousness that he must be, during his present 
pilgrimage, without a complete and an imme- 
diate fellowship with his Lord on the other, will 
finally change all such longings (after such a 
superimposed body) into a single great desire to 
leave this state of alienation in a foreign land, 
and to be at home with the Lord. Though in 
this life we have many animating experiences of 
Christ’s gracious nearness, and have access by 
faith to His throne of grace, we have neverthe- 
less to encounter many hinderances in conse- 
quence of our life in the flesh (Gal. ii. 20) and 
we cannot behold our Lord in His essential glory. 
But when a desire for a higher life has been 
awakened, we shall make the most earnest ef- 
forts, in every possible way, to please the Lord. 
Indeed every thing which is an essential condi- 
tion to the enjoyment of our future glory will 
give intensity to such efforts, for every one, 
without distinction, must expect a full revelation 
before the judgment seat of Christ. Every ac- 
tion, even of God’s children, during their bodily 
life, must there be judged according to the law 
of strict righteousness, and each believer must 
be rewarded according to his good or eyil con- 
duct. 

[3. Though our passage does not say that 
‘holy obedience is our only ¢it/e to eternal life” 
(Emmons), it does distinctly assert that believers 
are to be fully ‘‘manifested”’ at the judgment seat 
of Christ, and that the reward of grace will be 
proportioned exactly to that which they did in 
(διὰ) the earthly body. These ‘things done 
in the body” are neither expressly nor impliedly 
confined to any period of life after justification, 
whether this be placed in conversion or bap- 
tism]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke, iv. 7:—If God had set angels or glo- 
rified men to preach the Gospel, we should easily 
have been astonished at such instruments, and 
have ascribed the power to such glorious perso- 
nages. But now when so much is accomplished 
by poor and feeble men, the honor must be the 
Lord’s alone. (comp. 1 Cor. ii. 5).—Ver. 8. En- 
lightened souls are full of courage, and know 
how to accommodate themselves to crosses, Ps. iii. 
7f. xxvii. 1. If afflictions arise, they suffer not 
themselves to be overcome nor to cast away 
their confidence. If they become involved in 
dangerous circumstances, so that they know not 
how to extricate themselves, their courage will 
not fail, for they know that when all human aid 
is farthest, God’s hand is nearest—Ver. 9. God 
often protects his servants and his children in a 
wonderful manner, and helps them by means of 
other men. This is especially accomplished by 
means of those believers who pray for them 
(Acts xii. 5), minister to their temporal necessi- 
ties (Phil. iv. 14-20), and afford them the means 
of safety (chap. xi. 33), but it is not unfrequently 
accomplished also even by means of unbelievers 
(Acts xxi. 81 f.).—Observe the blessed fellowship 
of the members with their head! Christ’s life 
was nothing but a series of sufferings, a perpet~ 
ual dying, for he was poor, despised and pained 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 


87 





both in body and soul. His followers meet with 
the same trials, and they get no release but with 
their lives. Yet he preserves them, makes them 
joyful, often plucks them from danger as if by 
miracle, and thus proves that he is indeed alive. 
—Ver. 12. Hepinaer:—Faith seeks not conceal- 
ment, for it speaks, teaches and warns. The 
nearer we are to death, the more diligent we 
should be in our callings and our work. Hear- 
ers are strengthened and confirmed in their spi- 
ritual life by witnessing the sufferings and death 
of those preachers who steadfastly hold to the 
Gospel in all their trials.—Ver. 13. Faith gives 
us the right discourse, and therefore the best li- 
berty in speaking. Many speak much, but they 
will endure nothing in behalf of what they say, 
for they speak not as they should, and never 
speak from faith. (Gal. vi. 12).—Ver. 14. Since 
Jesus is the head of all true believers, they can 
no more remain dead than a member can remain 
separate from the head.—What,a joy, when we 
shall all be presented before Christ and be for- 
ever in his society!—Ver. 15. Where much suf- 
fering, and much consolation and help are expe- 
rienced, thanksgivings will also abound to the 
praise of God.—Ver. 17. In thy distress thou 
sayest, Ah! Lord, how long! But itis not long. 
It is only in thine infirmity that it seems long. 
What is time to eternity ?—Herpincer :—Light, 
light indeed, is the cross! Thou sayest No. it is 
heavy. Lift up thine eyes to the glory. What 
sayest thou now!—The more suffering on earth, 
the more joy in heaven; and yet all this is of 
grace and not of works, Rom. vi. 23. We de- 
serve as little for our sufferings as for our 
works. God makes use of them as of a file to 
rasp away all that is useless in us. They are 
His blessing to make the good seed germinate 
within us and grow up into glory. Our earth 
has many beautiful things to the praise of its 
Creator, but in heaven are things a thousand 
times more beautiful. Let the believer see and 
admire the earthly beauty, but let him believe 
and rejoice in the heavenly far more, for he will 
possess and refresh himself with them forever 
and ever. Are all visible things only temporal? 
then give thy heart to no creature. So use 
everything you have that it shall fix your heart 
more on God; and be able and willing ‘to let it go 
when He shall see fit to remove it. The children 
of this world seek satisfaction only in what is 
visible, in money and property, and reputation 
and worldly pleasures, but our spiritual natures 
can never be satisfied with such things. If the 
Divine light of faith has risen within us, we shall 
turn our thoughts to our spiritual welfare; we 
shall be more concerned that we may be sancti- 
fied and properly adorned in God’s sight, and 
that we may have the heavenly joy and glory he 
has promised; and hence we shall choose a higher 
and better portion.—Chap, V. 1. We have here 
a salutary lesson for those who have health, that 
they may not calculate with confidence upon 
their health, but frequently think of their per- 
ishable tabernacles, and may be always ready 
for a blessed departure. Equally salutary is it 
'. for the sick, that as their tabernacle begins to 

) break up, they may by faith lay hold upon the 
| dwelling God has built for them in heaven, and 
' joyfully be invested with it.—Ver. 4. A man 











must be a great hero who feels no terror at 
death; and although the saints have overcome 
it, they are not altogether free from apprehen- 
sions.—Ver. 5. All do not die happy, because 
they are not all prepared, and some have not 
the earnest of the Spirit.—Hrpincer :—Heaven 
will be glorious! Have we the seal and the let- 
ter for it? This is the Holy Spirit who con- 
vinces us of the truth, and so sweetens the bit- 
terness of death. —Ver. 6. Although Christ is 
every day with his people (Matth. xxviii. 20), 
and they live in communion with the Father, Son 
and Spirit (Chap. xiii. 14), they are not yet where 
they can behold his glory, and are only aliens so 
far as relates to such a revelation of God.— 
HeEpINGER:—Wilt thou not go home, my child? 
Away, for the danger is pressing! Go home to 
God and get out of trouble! Array thyself in 
such garments as will please the Lord! Get 
ready, O Pilgrim, for thine eternal home! Heb. 
xiii. 14,.—Ver. 7. To walk by faith is not a per- 
fect life, but it is essentially a great and glorious 
thing; for whoever desires it must be born of 
God and be united with him. In the future life 
of spiritual vision, the brightest object will be 
the Son of God, in whose glorified humanity we 
shall behold not only the majesty of his eternal 
Godhead, but also the Father and the Holy Spi- 
rit.—Ver. 8, Our home is where the place of 
blessedness is, where all believers have their 
home, where our Father, (James i. 18) our 
mother (Gal. iv. 26), our brethren, Christ, and 
those who have entered into glory are (Col. 111. 
1; Heb. xii. 22 f.); and there is our habitation, 
for we shall remain in it forever (Heb. xi. 14), 
and it is our inheritance (1 Pet. i. 4).—Rightly 
to wish for death is a mark of one who belongs 
to God and is ready for his departure to a blessed 
eternity (Phil. i. 23). Try thyself by this! Who- 
ever gives all his time and attention to the body, 
and so thinks nothing of his soul, how can he 
have pleasure in the thought that he is to jour- 
ney forth from the body (Rom. xiii. 14) ?—Ver. 
9. Only when we are by faith in Christ, and all 
our works are from Him, can our walk be pleas- 
ing toGod. The best evidence that we are en- 
tirely acceptable to God is, that we are striving 
in all things to please Him; and that we are dis- 
pleased with our own imperfections, and so are 
always humble.—Ver. 10. We are even now per- 
fectly manifest at all times before the Lord, but 
we need to become manifest hereafter, that the 
whole world may see what we have been, whether 
we were good or bad. Many can now play the 
rogue under their disguises, but in due time 
every thing shall be revealed before the eyes 
of angels and the whole world. Without fault 
of thine own thou mayest suffer, but God sees it, 
and he will surely bring thine innocence to light. 
Ye unjust judges who turn aside the righteous 
cause, and ye Epicurean worldlings who live 
without shame, and sport yourselves in sin, how 
will it be when you stand before Christ’s judg- 
ment seat? Turn or tremble (2 Chron. xix. 6 f.; 
1 Pet. iv. 5)! In this world it is often with the 
godly as if they were ungodly, and with the un- ᾿ 
godly as if they were godly (Eccles. ix. 2 f.). 
Should not the leaf some day be turned? God 
is righteous; and He must have a judgment day 
to give each one his due reward (Rom. ii. 6-9). 


88 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—_—_—————____ nnn nnn nn we nn — _—_———O—_. — ws... eee 


Bertens. Birnie, Ver. 7:—We need to be 
convinced of our inability, that grace may shine 
the brighter, and that we may not confound the 
creature with the Creator and nature with grace. 
God is not a God for seasons of prosperity or 
tourt favor merely, but a God of patience. We 
should bless Him for such methods with us as 
are indicated in Matth. xii. 20.—Ver. 8. A genu- 
ine triumphal song. Let no one ever despair; 
only be faithful. Though God never overburdens 
His children, they must expect sometimes to be 
in perplexity. But when our passions cease to 
boil, the impurities which might otherwise become 
sedentary, are driven off. Anxiety and doubt 
will retire before the spirit of faith.—Ver. 9. 
We must often be thrown like a ball hither and 
thither, but we need fear no evil for we have a 
Lord who delivers from death.—Ver. 10. We 
must not be ashamed of a sanctified cross-bear- 
ing. But first we must take up the cross, have 
fellowship in the death of Christ daily, and 
never shake off from our necks what God lays 
upon them.—Death before life! such is God’s 
inviolable law.—Our fallen nature cannot receive 
the blessed life of God in Christ, until we have 
given up our own mind and will to God.—Rea- 
son says: ‘‘What to me is a life which can be 
gained only by death?” and it praises the scorner 
who merrily enjoys the world. Others despise 
the idea as a vain fancy. But the believer 
knows better whom he has believed, and by what 
power it is that he must live.—Unless thou 
holdest before the eye of thy heart every day, 
hour and moment, as thy only true glass, the de- 
spised cross of Jesus, and His perpetual renun- 
ciation of Himself, no permanent rest canst thou 
know, and the Holy Spirit who is the Spirit of 
Christ and not of the world, can never dwell 
with thee.—Ver. 11. Thou art no longer in the 
state in which God made thee, but thou must be 
cured of disease before thou canst be blessed. 
Blame not God then and call Him cruel when He 
is carrying thee through this process. He never 
makes us experience the power of this death, 
until He bestows upon us a power to live a spi- 
ritual life. Christ therefore gains over our wills 
that He may subdue them in spite of the oppo- 
sition of the flesh. But a Christian always soars 
in spirit to the eternal and heavenly world, and 
thence derives strength for a new and secret 
life.—Ver. 12. God allows the Christian, on his 
first conversion, to enjoy much spiritual delight, 
that he may perceive the advantages he has 
gained, and may be encouraged to go forward in 
face of death.—It often seems a great mystery 
when the watchman suffers for those committed 
to his trust (Col. i. 24). And yet a good shep- 
herd is willing to give his life for the sheep 
(John x. 12), not indeed to redeem them, for 
Christ alone can do that, but because He is 
stronger and must go before them that are weak. 
—Ver. 13. Faith in Christ gives the believer a 
new life, for it draws down living and active 
energies from God; and while it allows Him no 
rest but in God, it gives him true rest there, 
with life and strength, victory and complete salva- 
tion. Noone must attempt to live without this 
Spirit, for nothing else can give us the beams of 
Divine light and cheer our souls, with the 
radiancy of a heavenly life. Where this exists 








deeply in the heart, it will fimd expression in 
the lips. It will take away all our timidity, and 
make us willing not only to confess Christ for 
ourselves, but to carry the Gospel to our fellow- 
men.—Ver. 14. He who raised up Jesus from 
the dead, imparts to all who put faith in Him, 
the confident assurance and lively feeling that 
they too shall not be left in the graye.—Christ 
has acquired the right to represent and intro- 
duce His members wherever He is Himself. He 
will hereafter bestow upon us blessings, far sur- 
passing what the Gospel now gives us, for ag 
yet we have had to endure very much of the 
shame of the cross.—Ver. 15. Ministers should 
strive to make all their sufferings as well as their 
labors a means of edification to all around them. 
—In no way is God more glorified than when 
man gives up himself in his utmost glory as no- 
thing, that he may be made what infinite wisdom 
and Jove may think best.—Ver. 16. A Christian 
should not voluntarily bring troubles upon him- 
self, for a false nature may of its own choice 
involve itself in difficulties, and then make a 
martyrdom out of it. 1 our heavenly Father is 
pleased to let our outward man, in connection 
with which God has in His wisdom decreed that 
all our spiritual and corporeal troubles shall 
take place, fall into decay and perish, His will 
be done. The renewal of the inner, the hidden 
man of the heart (1 Pet. iii. 4), is usually in con- 
nection with the decay of the outward man. In 
proportion as we are daily melted in the fire of 
affliction, we grow in the kingdom of God. Ac- 
cording to the crucifixion of our flesh will be the 
activity of the spirit and the life of the man in 
Christ.—Nothing more promotes the daily reno- 
vation of even the converted man, than the 
cross.—Every pain, sorrow and trouble is a 
needful birth pang, for the production of a new 
life and for its healthful growth.—Ver. 17. The 
fear of the cross, which young converts and 
many who are patiently pressing on in the Divine 
life, are accustomed to feel, outweighs all they 
can endure in this world, and is not worthy of 
mention if they think of making a merit or a 
matter of importance of their afflictions. How- 
ever long or severe any trial may be, it sinks to 
nothing, the moment we catch a reflection of the 
future glory. Our choleric tempers cannot long 
bear the fire of affliction. The suffering will seem 
intolerable because our sense and reason cannot 
get beyond the eternal and temporal.—You who 
complain so much of the weight of our sufferings, 
can yet bear very well the weight of glory which 
is to be found under the cross —Rejoice rather, 
for death, pain, sickness, and loss of honor, of 
property, of friends and of comforts, if for con-~ 
science’s sake, are nothing but gain. The mo- 
ment we begin to enjoy the fruits of our suffer- 
ings, we see the cross in a new light and are 
ashamed that we were not always faithful. In- 
deed, it ought to have been glory enough to bear 
reproach with the Son of God. But who can 
tell the glory which in another life follow these 
brief sufferings? Even a foretaste of these has 
often been sufficient to carry God’s people alto- 
gether beyond themselves, and to cause them ta 
break out into the highest strains of exultation. 
—Ver. 18. We must get accustomed to raise our 
thoughts above our outward state and seek in 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. 


V. 1-10. 89 


τ π΄ ΞΟ ΞΞΞΟΡΡΕΘΘΘΕΟ τ τ ““  -““π“ππ-“π-“ ee 


God, where our treasure and best portion are, 
the motives of our daily life, our consolation, 
our counsel and our peace. Our troubles will 
then seem very insignificant. As when a man is 
on a high tower or mountain, objects far below 
him seem very small and even invisible, so to a 
mind in communion with God, all temporal 
things and all sufferings of course will seem 
small indeed. We very soon find, when our car- 
nal minds try to make something interesting of 
the things that are seen, that they are indeed 
fleeting and vain. How easy then to use such 
things as a test whether we have true faith or 
not (Heb. xi. 1). Cuap. V. 1. How will it be 
with us when our present mortal bodies are dis- 
solved? We say indeed, we hope for the best. 
But what reason for hope have we? Those who 
in this life have been dead to sin, have put off the 
old man with its affections and lusts, when they 
come to die, give honor to Him who in His death 
gave them life; they have put on anew man, which 
after this life shall be invested with another 
body, a habitation in the Jerusalem which is 
above, an angelic body, formed indeed from this 
earthly one, but endowed with such heavenly at- 
tributes that it shall never be destroyed. He 
who is unwilling to have his old house demolished 
may well tremble when his Lord shall come, and 
after all shall break it up against his will.—Ver. 
2. Our sighs, which seem now so painful, are 
nevertheless longings which spring from a sight 
of something better and can be satisfied with 
nothing here.’ They are a kind of necessity for 
man; for after all, a great treasure, something 
supernatural, is concealed under them. Eternity 
is thus at work in our souls, for its eternal long- 
ings have taken possession of them. These may 
be faint and confused at first, and hence they 
must be directed and brought to distinctness. 
The longings have reference to the great end of 
our existence, but the sighs to our present con- 
dition along the way.—Ver. 3. The spirit of man 
appears to be by itself naked, as it were un- 
clothed. Itis therefore incomplete before God 
until it is invested with a new body of spiritual 
powers and light. Those who desire to enter the 
New Jerusalem must have within themselves that 
spiritual building which belongs to the new crea- 
tion, viz: the character and image of God, by 
which this mother can recognize her child.—Ver. 
4. Our mortality is now a burden, but God so 
changes its nature that when it is assailed we 
think of something very different. It is natural 
for us to wish we could avoid the separation of 
our souls from our bodies, and by an instantane- 
ous change (1 Cor. xv. 51 f.) be with Christ in 
the resurrection state. But ere this can be we 
must be unclothed. The mortal must be dried 
up, but life must enter its remains. Itis right 
to love life, but we may hasten too fast, or go in 
the wrong direction in pursuit of it. Here it is 
that sense is likely to intermeddle and do mis- 
chief. But Christ took upon Himself even this 
fleshly nature, though without sin. It isno evil in 
itself, but only a token that a man has life in 
himself. Christ assumed it not that He might 
retain it forever, but that he might in due time 
lay it aside. ‘‘Not my will,” He said, “as far 
as it is a human will, but Thy Divine will.” In 
that great conflict He maintained His ground, 


“ἢ 








and His success should be our encouragement. 
We may, indeed, see in Him what it costs to bring 
the will into its proper state. But just as He 
overcame, by subjecting the lower to the higher 
nature, so must we.—Ver. 5. God does not aban- 
don His work, and His spirit puts His seal upon 
our hearts that we may have, what we very much 
need, a certainty for the future.—Ver. 6. Just 
as far as we succeed in making the present 
world our home, we shall be absent from the 
Lord, and without the complete enjoyment of 
Him.—Ver. 7. Faith unites us with God and 
gives us as high a knowledge of Him as is: 
possible in the present life. But clear as this: 
faith is in itself, it is in fact dark to us. We: 
do not behold the face of God with an unob- 
structed vision. And yet this obscure faith 
gives us a far brighter light than can ever be: 
attained by seeking to find out God by the high- 
est exercise of merely human reason.—Ver. 8. 
Though we are yet far from our native land, we 
are full of cheerful confidence. We are citizens 
of it still (Eph. ii. 19; Phil. iii. 20), and in some 
respects are already there (Heb. xii. 22).—. 
Ver. 9. Wherever we may be, our only honors: 
are in another world; let us, then, for the pre- 
sent be satisfied with God’s allotments, and give: 
ourselves completely up to be led as He pleases.— - 
Ver. 10. This is a stimulus which the believer: 
always needs, for he has always some remnants. 
of an evil nature.—Everything which is now: 
concealed must one day come to light, and be: 
either condemned or approved. It is surely a 
righteous thing that God should recompense: 
to every man what he has thought, spoken, or- 
done, according to all that he has done by means; 
of the body. Everything which men have done: 
—all the evil which the redeemed as well as the: 
good, which the lost have done, will be investi-- 
gated and scrutinized with the strictest justice. 
—Blessed, indeed, will they be whose works shall 
be found right. And yet those in whom Christ 
Jesus lives, reigns and works will own Him as 
the source of all their goodness. Such a bles- 
sedness and dignity will be of the most exalted 
nature. No works will then be recognized or 
accepted before God except those which belong: 
to believers justified by faith, and saved by 
grace; for all others will be traced to some false: 
principle. 

Rigrger:—Ver. 7. God conceals His choicest 
instruments under the lowliness of the Cross—- 
not that they may be undervalued, but that they 
may show their unshaken dependence upon the- 
Lord Jesus.—The ability and disposition to un-. 
dertake the work of the ministry, the knowledge: 
of Christ by means of a Divine enlightenment, 
the honesty not to seek our own selves, the wil- 
lingness to spend and be spent in the service of: 
another, the courage never to be ashamed of any 
of Christ’s words, the good conscience which 
nevertheless avoids all private dishonor, the sin- 
cerity which never corrupts God’s word, and the: 
untiring patience which never gives out—all this: 
treasure Christ’s servants have in a frail outward: 
man (chap. iv. 16) in an earthly tabernacle which 
is liable to be broken up at any moment (chap. 
γ. 1). Such an earthly vessel may have a spe- 
cial fragility of its own (comp. x. 10) in addition 
to the general weakness of its kind. If we are 


90 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





never weary, if our spirit and power is demon- 
strated in the consciences of other men, and if 
we are sufficient for all our duties, it is because 
we continually receive from God a stream of in- 
fluences which keeps us in dependence upon Him 
and sustains our inward life. Thus our weak- 
ness and the Divine support are always seen in 
mutual relations.—Ver. 8ff. As the Apostle re- 
peats his “not, not,” we not only see the encou- 
ragement which faith supplies and the victory 
he gained over his own natural feelings, but the 
happy issue of each trial tends to bring to light 
and to refute those secret objections which other 
men are apt to feel with respect to the humilia- 
tions of the Cross.—Ver. 10f. The infirmities 
which our Lord Jesus took upon Himself, and 
which continued with Him until death, the pur- 
pose never to use His Divine powers for His perso- 
nal relief, whatever contempt might be heaped 
upon Him on this account by carnal-minded 
men, are now the proper medium through 
which we have fellowship with Him in His life, 
and we must now bear them about with us, 
and never intentionally conceal them.—Ver. 12. 
It is in Christ’s ministers that we may most im- 
pressively see the fellowship of Christ’s suffer- 
ings and the likeness of His death; but in the 
conversion of souls, in the powerful effects of the 
Gospel, in the awakening life and flourishing 
condition of the Church, we have a proportionate 
proof of His life.—Ver. 18. Those who openly 
confess the truth and cheerfully suffer for it, 
must have a believing spirit and a firm hold upon 
invisible realities.—Ver. 14. Faith always finds 
access to God only through Christ. The resur- 
rection and glorification of Jesus is the true 
ground for hoping that God will raise up and 
present us also. ‘Only in this light shall we be 
able to estimate what each one gains or loses un- 
der the sufferings or unclothings of our present 
state.—Ver. 15. Every thing we ministers ac- 
quire by our spiritual treasures is intended to 
win, to confirm, and to relieve, as much as possi- 
ible, you the people. The more, then, you observe 
how this abounding ‘grace of God sustains us un- 
der our trials, the more you have reason to give 
‘God thanks.—Ver. 16. Our bodies, lives, health, 
‘strength, comforts, prospects and all that we 
‘have on earth, may be gradually wasted in con- 
sequence of our fellowship with Christ’s suffer- 
ings; but the heart, the spirit which animates us 
in it, and the willingness to spend every thing in 
the service of God, will never be changed, be- 
cause it is always enlivened by hope.—Ver. 17. 
According to the great principle of the Divine 
‘kingdom: ‘Through suffering to glory,” every 
trouble we have gives us a pledge of the glory, a 
salutary foretaste of the powers of the world to 
come, such as we could never obtain without the 
decay of our outward man.—Ver. 18. Every mo- 
ment, in all our public discourses, testimonies, 
ministerial work, and intercourse with our peo- 
ple, we are making our choice and laying hold 
upon and aiming at either the temporal or the 
eternal.—Cnap. y. 1. The word of God and the 
spirit of faith which it products tends uniformly 
to humility, but never to feebleness of spirit ; and 
it teaches men to think but little, but not con- 
temptuously, of the body. Inasmuch as houses, 
tents, clothing, are very necessary and very con- 


venient, we should learn that our bodies are not 
to be hated. But as such things can be laid 
aside and be changed without tearing away any 
portion of our hearts, we should learn that our 
bodies ought not to be over-valued.—The house 
which is from heaven, that portion of the hea- 
venly glory which every believer will have for 
an ornament and a covering, and the residence 
in which the inward life of his spirit manifests 
itself to others and receives from them its high- 
est enjoyments, is not given him until the earthly 
tabernacle falls off; for it has been prepared, 
designed and promised only for that occasion. 
As this is of heavenly origin, it will never be 
Jissolved, and can perceive heavenly things.— 
Vers. 2-4. Our heavenly calling gives us the 
hope of a house above, while we are enduring 
the oppression of our earthly tabernacle, that we 
may under both influences sigh to be clothed 
upon by the higher house.—Our spiritual nature 
has always abundant reason to long for a deliver- 
ance from our present bodies. Great as our en- 
joyments may be on earth, we cannot but sigh 
for something better. Our reluctance to be un- 
clothed may therefore be beneficial in moderating 
and purifying our longings for deliverance.— 
‘Ver. 5. By faith and the dealings of His provi- 
dence, God is always preparing us for this glory, 
always cherishing our hopes and longings for it, 
and always chastening and purifying the expres- 
sion of our desires. Oh, how wisely has God 
combined together in our worldly and spiritual 
experience these after throes of our troublesome 
life and these longings for future glory !—Vers. 
6-8. True faith prepares us for either alterna- 
tive; whether to remain in the flesh, or to lay 
aside our present tabernacles.— We walk by faith, 
and we are therefore cheerful during our pil- 
grimage; bul. the feeling that our Lord is not in 
sight often makes us forlorn and desolate when 
we are in trouble.—Nothing that we can do or 
enjoy on earth can be compared with being ab- 
sent from the body and at home with the Lord.— 
Ver. 9f. The effort to be, and the consciousness 
that we are, accepted of the Lord, is our strength 
along the way, and will be our satisfaction when 
we resch our home.—This Divine approbation 
will be publicly awarded when we stand at the 
judgment seat of Christ.—Great power of faith, 
which makes us joyful even in the day of 
judgment! 

Hrevusner:—Chap. iv. 7. In these dying bodies 
great and glorious treasures are hidden. We 
are never perfectly pure and true, except when 
we ascribe every thing good to God.—Ver. 8. 
The Christian’s superiority to the world and his 
peculiar skill are owing to his watchfulness, 
steadfastness οὐ purpose, cheerfulness and calm- 
ness of mind.—Ver. 9. The more persecution 
and ill-will ye receive from our fellow-men, the 
more cheering is God’s favor, and the nearer is 
His aid. When the danger is most imminent, 
His servauts may feel sure of a speedy deliver- 
ance.—Ver. 10f. The death and the life of Christ 
should be revealed in every Christian by a con- 
tinual self-sacrifice for others, and by a power to 
overcome all temporal sufferings.—Ver. 12. The 
more a man sacrifices himself, the more power he 
has over others. In this case life comes from 
death.—Ver. 18. When faith urges thee on, let 

[ 


ὼ 


A 


1 


; 
Ε 


CHAP. IV. 7-18. V. 1-10. 


91 





not thy mouth keep thee back. But without 
faith, thy speech will displease God and have no 
blessing. Without faith no one can give a true 
testimony for God; but with faith no one can re- 
frain from it.—Ver. 14. The hope of an eternal 
life makes us strong to give up a temporal.— 
Ver. 15. The reason that pious men are kept in 
the world is that they may bring the wandering 
to the path of safety. God’s grace should be ce- 
lebrated by well-filled choirs. It is sad to hear 
His praises from such feeble choirs on earth. 
Thank God, it will not be so in heaven !—Ver. 
16. The more our life of sense is renounced, the 
purer, the stronger and the more triumphant 
will be the life of the spirit. Piety always re- 
juvenates the inner man (Isa. xl. 80 f.).—Vers. 
17, 18. Troubles are light when they come from 
men, and affect only the cutward man. All that 
earth can do is as nothing to him who has God’s 
grace; but God’s wrath is terrible indeed! Our 
indemnification for all sufferings and sacrifices is 
infinitely greater than our pains, our reproaches, 
and the loss of all earthly things could be; for God 
gives us everlasting joy and honor. The only 
condition is a heavenly mind, directed to the 
eternal world as the needle to the pole. We 
should see no reality any where else.—Cuap. v. 
1. The hope of a glorified body comforts the sick 
and holds the spirit as if it were a foreigner in 
the (earthly) body.—Ver. 2. The worldly man is 
terrified at the thought of losing his body, and 
he wishes it might be his home forever; but the 
Christian sighs for its dissolution. A truly pious 
longing to die is the Christian’s home-sickness, 
but the desire which many have to die is only a 
desire to be free from trouble.—Ver. 3. A body 
is necessary to the soul, and the resurrection of 
the body will bring an inconceivable augmenta- 
tion to our bliss. Ver. 4. Nearly all the troubles 
and ‘oppressions which we experience during our 
earthly life spring from the body. Ver. 5. God 
has reserved to man a better portion than this 
world can give. The Holy Spirit, by a celestial 
birth, makes us children of God, and, of course, 
immortal. Whoever knows by experience this 
Divine life, can never think of its interruption or 
cessation. A Divine life must be an eternal life. 
—Ver. 6. Our earthly life of care is only a brief 
pilgrimage.—Ver. 7. Our only fellowship with 
the Lord must be by faith. On earth we cannot 
behold Him immediately, nor hold direct inter- 
course with Him through any of our senses. 
None but a fanatic will think of a visible intui- 
tive enjoyment of Him here.—Ver. 8. The Chris- 
tian’s home-sickness never paralyzes, enfeebles or 
effeminates him, as a natural home-sickness fre- 
quently does the worldly man; but it rather 
sanctifies and strengthens him» ‘Ver. 9. The 
assurance of being united to Christ makes the 
believer long more earnestly to plé*se the Lord. 
This will not leave him even in the future world, 
for even there shall he remain in the service of 
the Lord.—Ver. 10. 1. We must all sfand before 
Him, for none can escape Him. Whoever is in- 
clined to call this right of Christ in question will 
surely experience its terror in his own heart. 2. 
The thought that thy heart will be revealed is 
‘either joyful and comforting or terrible (John συ. 
24. We read elsewhere of a condemning, but 


) 


} 


\ 











here of a revealing judgment. The latter is ra. 
ther a Christian glorification). 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 7. The transcendent 
power which triumphs over all earthly things, 
which makes the ministers of Christ superior to 
all suffering, and which sometimes is communi: 
cated from him to others, is owing not to the ex: 
cellence of the vessel, but to the preciousness of 
the treasure it contains; not to the person of the 
preacher, but to the name he proclaims; not to 
the natural ability of man, but to God’s grace and 
word of power. The saying the Apostle uses re- 
specting the treasure in earthern vessels is true in 
general of all Christians who possess the precious 
pearl, Christ Jesus, in the shell of this natural 
life.—Vers. 8-10. “I shall never die,” says the 
Church, as she bears forth the treasures of 
Christ’s kingdom, ‘‘but live to make the Lord’s 
work known to all men” (Ps. exviii. 17).—Vers. 
13, 14. Though much distress may follow her 
confession, faith can never withhold the confes- 
sion itself (Rom. x. 10), and in making it she 
becomes conscious of herself and grows.—Ver. 
15. The more thanksgiving, the more grace (Ps. 
1. 23).—Ver. 16. At no time do the energies of a 
new life stream forth so freshly and with such 
quickening power upon the heart of the Christian 
as when he is in the vale of adversity. ‘Day 
by day!” Paul was not ‘already perfect.”— 
Ver. 17. In God’s hand is a pair of balances; 
one scale of which is called Time and the other 
Eternity. In the former are weighed earthly 
afflictions, and in the other future glory.—Cuap. 
v. 1. Christ gives Himself to His people, even in 
this life, in such a way that they may be one 
spirit and one body with Him spiritually, and 
also sacramentally by faith; but when we behold 
Him in our spiritual bodies, He will prove Him- 
self to be that perfect Love which communicates 
its whole self to its loved ones!—Ver. 3. We 
need to be clothed and covered in this life, or we 
can never be clothed upon with our house from 
heaven in the day of the Lord. We must put on 
the Lord Jesus Christ, as He gives Himself now 
for a spriritual clothing to all who receive Him 
by faith through the word and sacraments (Gal, 
iii. 27; Rom. xiii. 14). Only thus shall we be 
able, in the day of final visitation, to put on the 
same Christ in His glory (Rom. viii. 30), over 
our present mortal nature, whose original naked- 
ness will be covered by grace and so will be ca- 
pable of the further investiture of a glorious im- 
mortality (Rom. iii. 18).—Ver. 4. Asin Spring 
the green branches and leaves are thrown over 
the trees and transform the rigid mourning ha- 
biliments of Winter into the fresh garments of 
Spring, so will the Lord Jesus Christ, our life 
from heaven (Col. iii. 4), triumphantly lay hold 
upon all that is mortal in us and abolish it in an 
immortal nature (1 Cor. xy. 54 f.).—Vers. 6-8. 
The native citizens of heaven are foreigners on 
earth, just as the heirs of the promised land were 
wanderers without a home in the wilderness 
(Heb. xi. 18-16). Our residence in earthly bo- 
dies necessarily implies that we should have pos- 
session of and perceive our Saviour in no other 
way than by faith. Sense and reason cannot 
apprehend Him; only faith, the new sense which 
God gives to the new man, and which is conver« 


92 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








sant with things unseen, can discover or receive| ness of these bodies be manifested, when those 
Him as He is presented in the Gospel.—Ver. 10. | features of sorrow which have been imprinted 
Just as in this life our body is the vessel and in- | upon our mortal bodies, so as to make us like 
strument for all that we have and do by faith, so | Christ here, shall be brightened up in our risen 
in another life will the body be the vessel and | bodies with the reflected radiance of our Lord’s 
instrument for possessing and enjoying by means | glorified body (Rom, viii. 29). 

of direct vision. Gloriously will the blessed- 


X.—FURTHER ASSERTION OF THE PURITY OF HIS CONDUCT AND OF ITS PRO. 
FOUNDER REASONS. THESE DEPEND UPON HIS RELATION TO CHRIST AND HIS 
SPECIAL WORK TO MAKE KNOWN GOD’S METHOD OF RECONCILIATION BY 
CHRIST. 


CuHarTerR V. 11-21. 


11 Knowing therefore the terror [fear] of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are 
made manifest unto God; and [I trust also are made manifest in your consciences. 
12 For [om. For]' we commend not ourselves again unto you, but [we say this to] give you 
occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to answer them which 
13 glory in appearance [in face, ἐν προσώπῳ], and tot in® heart. For whether we be 
beside ourselves, z¢ 7s to [for] rod: or whether we be sober [of sound mind], 7¢ zs for 
14 your cause. For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge [judged], 
15 that if [om. 17} one died for all, then [therefore] were all dead [all died]: And that 
[om. that] he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto them 
selves, but unto him which died for them [om. for them] and rose again [for them]. 
16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after [according to] the flesh: yea [om. yea] 
though [and if] we have known Christ after [according to] the flesh, yet now hence- 
17 forth know we him no more [so no longer]. Therefore [so that, ὥστε] if any man be 
in Christ he 7s a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things [they]® 
18 are become new. And all things are of God, who has reconciled us to himself by 
Jesus [om. Jesus]® Christ, and hath given [gave] to us the ministry of reconciliation ; 
19 To wit, that [because, ὡς ὅτι] God was in Christ, reconciling the [a] world unto 
himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the 
20 word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did 
beseech you [om. you] by us: we pray you [om. you] in Christ’s stead, be ye [om. ye] 
21 reconciled to God. For [om. For]' he hath made him ἕο dc sin for us whoeknew no 
sin; that we might be made [become]* the righteousness of God in him. 


1 Ver. 12.—The testimony in behalf of yap is not convincing; it is omitted by the best authorities [B. C. D. (1st Cor.) 
f. 6. Sin., the Lat. Syr. and Copt. versions, Chrysost. and Theodoret et. al. Tisch. inserts it however, and thinks it betrays 
no evidence of being an emendation]}. ; 

2 Ver. 12—Lachmann has μὴ ἐν before καρδίᾳ [and he is sustained by B. and Sin. et. al.] but it is not sufficiently 
authenticated. It was probsbly an emendation to adapt the passage to the subjective explanation [Winer’s Gram. ὃ 59, 1. 
In D. (1st. Cor.) E. F. we have instead οὐκ év}. 

8 Ver. 15.—The εἰ before els is left out in the best MSS.; it was probably an interpolation to make out a better logical 
connection. De Wette thinks it was left out by a mistake of transcribers, or because a hypothetical form of expressicn 
seemed improper on such a subject [Tischendorf inserts ei, but acknowledges the high authority of B. and Ὁ, (to which 
must now be added Sinait.) against him. He was much influenced by the testimony of the Vulg. and Vopt. versivns and his 
favorite C. Alford and Meyer omit the word], 

4 Verse 15.—Aé after εἰ was probably inserted for the sake of the connection, but strong testimony is against it. Some 
MSS. have ei δὲ, and others καὶ εἰ. {Lachm. and Alford have εἰ cai; Rec. has εἰ δὲ καὶ]. 

5 Ver. 17.—Lachm. throws out τὰ πάντα on the authority of B. C. ef. al., and by others these words are placed before 
καινά. Meyer thinks that transcribers passed over them on account of the following τὰ δὲ πάντα. [Tisch, agrees with the 
Rec. in inserting them, but Alford and Stanley (with B. C. Ὁ, (1st Cor.) F. and Sin. e¢ al.) omit them 

[5 Ver. 18.—Ree. has ᾿Ιησοῦ before χριστοῦ, but the best MSS. B.C. Ὁ. (1st Cor.) F. and Sin., most of the versions and 
Chrysost.) omit it}. 

T Ver. 21.—In the best MSS. yap is wanting. 

8 Ver. 21.—-Authorities are decidedly in favor of γενώμεθα, Rec, has γινώμεθα, [Alford says, “ with none of our MSS,;* 
but it has many cursives to sustain it]. 


CHAP. V. 11-21. 


-————. SS 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 11, 12. Knowing therefore the 
fear of the Lord.—This is probably an infer- 
ence from vv. 9 and 10, but doubts have been 
raised respecting not only that inference but the 
interpretation of the individual sentences and 
their relation to one another. Some take τοῦ 
κυρίου as the genitive of the subject, ἡ, 6. since we 
know the terror of the Lord, and are acquainted 
with the fear which it inspires, or since we are 
not ignorant of the fearful things we must meet 
when we stand before Christ’s judgment seat, 
and behold His awful majesty. In this case our 
minds are turned to the fearful judgment which 
is to reveal all things and to arraign all who 
have done evil (ver. 10). It must be conceded 
that the expression never has such a meaning 
any where else in the New Testament and espe- 
cially in Paul’s writings, where it evidently sig- 
nifies the fear we have for God. And yet with 
this latter meaning eidérec—[ which always refers 
to beholding (or knowing in consequence of be- 
holding) what is visible to the external sense ]— 
does not seem to correspond; we should rather 
have had ἔχοντες. Riickert’s explanation, know- 
ing the true fear of the Lord, ¢. e. in what it 
consists, introduces something new, for in the 
context we have had no reference to any false 
fear to which this would be opposed. But the 
interpretation proposed by Meyer ef al. viz. ‘since 
we are no strangers to the feeling of a holy reve- 
rence for Christ as our Judge;’ has no gramma- 
tical objection to it, for the perf. εἰδέναι may 
have the sense of not only a practical (to under- 
stand something), but a theoretical knowledge 
(comp. Phil. iv. 12) [especially when it is de- 
rived from an intercourse with the things known]. 
Neander paraphrases the sentence thus: ‘we 
know what the fear of the Lord (Christ) requires 
of a man; for it will make him act under a 
sense of his responsibility.’”— we convince 
men.—The same words in Gal. i. 10, have the 
sense of: to win over to our side by argumenis 
(comp. Acts xii. 20). The idea of something im- 
moral is connected with it there, on account of 
the context; and hence some regard it here, 
either as a question, (do we persuade men?) 
which is hardly allowable, or as an indicative 
sentence expressing a bare possibility: ‘even if 
Τ couid deceive men (craftily persuade, or draw 
over by talking) I should nevertheless be mani- 
fest to God.’ The mere indicative, however, 
could not be made to express this, and an arbi- 
trary interpolation of some clause like: ‘‘as our 
opponents say,’’ would become necessary. But 
even if the word is taken in the sense of: to 
convince, we are led to inquire, of what? Some 
reply: ‘that we know the fear of the Lord,’ or, 
‘that we fear the Lord.’ But this is not very 
agreeable to the relations of the sentence. Others 
say: ‘that we are earnestly endeavoring to be 
acceptable to God’ (ver. 9), and hence ‘that we 
are sincere in our work.” This seems to us 
most natural; and Neander thus paraphrases 
it: ‘we are called upon to prove what our dis- 
nosition is;’ this can be manifest only to God, 
for man can take cognizance of no such matter. 
We therefore endeavor to convince men that they 





98 


ῃ 


do us injustice (by their objections), and that 
we are actuated by a true Christian spirit. 
Certainly the subject of discussion in the con- 
nection was the person and the ministry of the 
Apostle; and nothing leads us to think of a per- 
suasion of the general truth of Christianity, as 
if a motive for the better performance of his 
work was to be drawn from what is mentioned 
in ver. 10. Such a construction would essen- 
tially destroy the idea of any thing to be gained 
for Christianity.—We now come to the contrast: 
—but to God we have been already man- 
ifested,—and the sentence connected with it: 
—and I hope also we have been mani- 
fested in your *‘consciences,—in which we 
have an obvious reference to chap. iv: 2 where 
he had spoken of commending themselves to 
the conscience of every man (συνιστάντες ἑαυτοὺς 
πρὸς πᾶσαν συνείδησιν ἀνϑρώπ). Even this, how- 
ever, refers probably to the manner in which 
he had discharged his Apostolic duties, and to 
the honest and sincere efforts he had made to 
please only God. He knew he was without con- 
cealment in the presence of the Omniscient, 
whose perfect light will reveal not him alone, 
but all things before the judgment seat of Christ 
(ver. 10). He also hoped that he was made 
manifest in the consciousness, or the conscience 
of the Corinthians among whom the Divine light 
had shone so brightly, and among whom he had 
given so many impressive proofs of his spirit. 
᾿Ἐλπίζειν is here expressive of an opinion that 
something was true, and the confident expecta- 
tion that it would turn out to be so. Observe 
the transition to the first pers. sing. on the 
introduction of a matter so purely personal. 
From a point which God had so distinctly 
revealed that it needed no more attention 
to secure a favorable judgment, the Apostle 
turns to convince those who could not see 
his heart and who were too easily influenced 
by false appearances and the unfavorable re- 
marks of others, that he was not actuated in 
what he was saying by an idle vanity of which 
God would disapprove, but by a pious regard for 
the great day of final revelation. In this convic- 
tion is involved also the consequences to himself 
after all the gain, the confidence and the esteem 
he might acquire, and of course the opposite 
prejudices he might have to meet, should be set 
aside. The object of the sentence, however, is 
not precisely to assign the motive of his conduct 
(écdérec), as if he had said: ‘Since we know” 
(a form which would best suit Luther’s transla- 
tion: ‘So fahren wir schin mit den Leuten,” [also 
Tyndale’s and Cranmer’s English version: ‘we 
fare fayre wyth men], 7. ¢., we do not tyrannize 
over and drive the people by excommunications, 
etc., but we teach them by gentle means, etc.; a 
translation and an interpretation which is op- 
posed to the grammatical sense); but it is to 
define more particularly the πείϑομεν, and to show 
that it was done in a pious spirit. So far as re- 
lates to the essential meaning, it comes to the 
same result whether τοῦ κυρίου be taken as the 
genitive of the object or the genitive of the subject. 
In either case the Apostle intended to assure them 
in the participial sentence (ver. 11) that he acted 
under a reverential sense of the Divine presence 
and with reference to that tribunal before which 


94 





all things were to be revealed. We may, per- 
haps, explain it thus: we act in full view of the 
awful things connected with the Judge, or under 
the reverential fear which the thought of him, 7. 
e., the terror of the Lord the Judge, awakens, 
The common usage of the language would proba- 
bly decide us in favor of the former view.—We 
are not again commending ourselvesunto 
you.—The γὰρ, which some important manu- 
scripts insert after ov, has induced some com- 
mentators to look for an intimate connection 
with ver. 11. The Apostle has been made to 
say: ‘we hope we have been manifest in your 
consciences, for we are not commending our- 
selves, etc. He did not commend himself, for he 
presupposed that he had already been made 
manifest to their consciences. I am already as- 
sured of your confidence, for I am not thus com- 
mending myself in order to recommend myself 
to you, but it is to give you, ec. But as the 
best critical authorities are not in favor of the 
γάρ, a very good connection is made out, by sup- 
posing that he is here meeting a possible mis- 
construction of the confidence he had expressed, 
or rather of the whole vindication he had made of 
himself in ver. 11, comp. on iii. 1.—But we say 
these things to give you an occasion for 
boasting on our behalf.—From the words 
ἑαυτοὺς συνιστάνομεν, we conclude that λέγομεν 
ταῦτα (not ἐσμέν) must be supplied before ἀλλὰ ---- 
διδόντες. The word ἀφορμῇ occurs also in chap. xi. 
1 51. ν. 133 Rom. vil. 8,11: 1. Τίσι: τ, 14.” Tt 
properly signifies the point from which an un- 
dertaking takes its start, a point of support, a 
holding point; hence the necessary means for 
doing or attaining any thing, the materials or 
means which give occasion for it. In connection 
with this, καύχημα must mean, not the matter re- 
specting which one glories, but only the honor 
or glory which is the result of the glorying. 
The words ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν signify, in our favor, for 
our advantage, as in chap. vii. 4, 14; viii. 24; 
ix. 2, 3; xii. 5 (giving him the honor due for his 
faithful and sincere labors in planting and sus- 
taining the Church). This idea is carried out 
in the final sentence:—that ye may have an 
answer against those who boast in ap- 
pearance (face) and not in heart.—After 
ἵνα ἔχητε, either τί or λέγειν τί must be under- 
stood. The sense of ἔχειν here is: to have in 
readiness (1 Cor. xiv. 26), and πρός must signify : 
against. They should have something with 
which they might meet the Apostle’s opponents, 
with whom they had become so captivated that 
they needed to have such an occasion given them 
by him. We have here a delicate reference to 
the way in which they had been turned against 
him by the influence of such men. Those against. 
whom the Corinthians ought to have boasted in 
his behalf, he calls in an antithetical sentence, 
men who boasted ἐν προσώπῳ καὶ ob καρδίᾳ. By 
ἐν προσώπω he must have meant either: in the 
sight of men, in contrast with those who had a 
true approbation of their own consciences before 
God, or (in better correspondence with usage 
in other places 1 Cor. 111. 21, et al.): what 
was visible in the sight of men. In the latter 
case, πρόσωπῳ and καρδίᾳ would stand in con- 
trast with one another, as the external and the 
internal. Πρόσωπον would be equivalent to the 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





face or countenance, and the object of ‘their 
boasting would be the holiness, the zeal, the 
love, etc., which might be seen in a man’s pre- 
sence, not what existed intheheart. The hearts 
of those to whom he here alluded, he implies 
were destitute of all that of which they boasted. 
He designates their act not according to its in- 
tention, but according to the fact. (Meyer). Or 
πρόσωπον may be taken as equivalent to the per- 
son (whether it were a man’s own or other peo- 
ple’s person), personal relations, connections, 
leaders, ancestors, and particularly his external 
relations to Christ (ver. 16; xi. 18 f.; 1 Cor. i. 
12); and καρδία, in this case, would signify that 
which is internal and noblest in man, that which 
God looks upon (1 Sam. xvi. 7) as the seat of 
faith, the proper ground of all true boasting. 
(Osiander). As πρόσωπον almost uniformly bears 
in other places the sense of the face, the first in- 
terpretation is probably to be preferred. The 
sense will then be: those who boast not so much 
of the heart as of the face, and whose piety, 
therefore, is seen entirely in the countenance, 
ete. The reference, therefore, is to hypocrites. 
[Chrysostom: ‘*He does not bid them glory on 
his account absolutely, 7. e., when no cause ex- 
isted, and they had no occasion, but when his 
adversaries began to extol themselves. In all 
things he looks out for a fitting occasion. His 
object was not to induce them to make him il- 
lustrious, but to silence those who improperly 
commended themselves to the injury of others. 
Such gloried in what is seen for display. They 
did all things out of a love of honor, and they 
wore an aspect of piety and venerability, while 
they were empty inwardly and destitute of good 
works.’’] 

Vers. 13-15, For whether we have been 
beside ourselves it is for God.—He now 
shows them that they had good reason for boast- 
ing of him rather than of those who depreciated 
him, for if he was to be judged by what he had 
done among them, they could not doubt his sin- 
cerity. Two different judgments might be passed 
upon him, and are pointed out in εἶτε ἐξέστημεν 
and εἶτε σωφρονοῦμεν. [They referred to his for- 
mer (ἐξέστημεν) and to his present (σωφρονοῦμεν) 
state of mind. In his former course (either 
when he was at Corinth, or when in some part 
of his epistles he had commended himself), he 
might have seemed to some beside himself with 
zeal and earnestness, but more recently he might 
have seemed to the same persons unduly reserved 
and sober. In both cases he may have been 
charged with acting an interested and artful 
part; whereas he maintains that he was governed 
by higher motives, which prompted him to adapt 
himself to varying circumstances]. The first, 
however, may have been more especially the 
judgment of his opponents, and showed the low 
estimate they had formed of him. It was not 
that he had overacted his part (Luther: done too 
much, dealt sharply with the people), nor merely 
that he had been foolish or had acted foolishly. 
Nor do we understand by the word here used 
that he was charged with going beyond the limits 
either of ordinary intelligence (mysterious con- 
templations), or of intelligent consciousness es 
stasy); for neither of these things are hinted at 
in the context. Nor does the extravagance al- 


ὡς 


CHAP. V. 11-21. 





luded to seem to have been a transgression of pro- 
priety by an excessive self-glorification (Schott), 
nor an immodesty of deportment (R. Cath.). The 
idea intended is rather that of losing one’s 
senses, an insanity in contrast with being of 
good mind, reasonable (σωφρονεῖν). In like man- 
ner ἐξέστη is used in Mark iii. 21, and μαίνεσϑαι 
in Acts xxvi. 25. The objection to him was not 
that he had commended himself, as in chap. xi. 
17 f.), in which case σωφρονεῖν would signify, to 
be diffident in this respect; to God would then 
signify, for the honor of God; and for your sake 
would mean simply as a salutary example or as 
an instance of condescension for you. Such a 
sentiment would not have been needful after what 
he had said in ver. 12. He probably had before his 
mind the whole course of his action, for this had 
probably seemed to his opponents as madness. 
In contrast with the Judaizers especially, he had 
shown a burning zeal for the advancement of the 
pure Gospel, for the conversion of souls and for 
the perseverance and progress of those who had 
been converted. Did he then have reference to 
his personal experiences, such as his sudden 
conversion or his ecstatic state? The contrast as 
well as the following sentence seem to favor the 
allusion rather to his whole conduct, his general 
activity. But even on the supposition that his 
opponents were right, he suggests that the mad- 
ness they imputed to him was an extreme devo- 
tion to God, in the service of his Lord, and there- 
fore worthy of esteem. But he adds—whether 
we are now sober minded, it is for you.— 
if any one saw his conduct in an opposite light, or 
thought he acted jn a reasonable and wise man- 
ner, he assured them it was all for their welfare. 
This explanation, according to which the Apostle 
speaks of his conduct as it appeared to others 
and was judged by them, seems to us much more 
simple and more eligible than that which Osiander 
defends; according to which he speaks on the one 
hand of his actual deportment, of his transcen- 
dant style of doctrine and practice, and of his 
highly exalted spiritual life, which he however 
contends actually redounded to the glory of God; 
and on the other hand of his more tranquil and ju- 
dicious manner of action, which was better under- 
stood and more generally useful. Had such been 
the Apostle’s meaning he makes use in the first 
clause of an ambiguous expression, an amphiboly, 
in which he refers ironically to his opponents’ 
insinuation, that he had been enthusiastically ex- 
travagant. The signification of ἐξέστη, adopted 
by Hofmann (Schrigtbew, II. p. 323): “to be in an 
exalted state of inspiration” is not favored by 
the common usage of the words.—For the love 
ef Christ constraineth us (ver. 14).—He 
here gives a reason not for what he had said in 
the first half of ver. 18, but for his assertion 
that his course of action had been sincere, and 
that whatever might be its appearance before 
men, it was for the service of God and for the 
welfare of his brethren. In this sentence the 
words τοῦ Χριστοῦ are in the genitive of the sub- 
ject according to the prevalent usage of Paul 
with respect to this phrase; comp. chap. viii. 24; 
xiii, 13; Rom. v. 5, 8; viii. 35, 39; Eph. ii. 4; 
iii. 19; Phil. i. 9 et al. (The personal object of 
the ἀγάπη is introduced by εἰς in Col. i. 4 and 1 
Thess. iii. 12). Ia what follows also it is evi- 


95 


dent that the object is to point out the highest 
manifestation of Christ’s love. Although this 
love of Christ is a power which produces love to 
Christ, we are not to suppose both points em- 
braced in the expression here. The verb συνέχει 
means either, it presses, it drives, or, it holds 
together. The pronoun judas, however, cannot 
mean here, you and me (to hold us together in 
friendship), but, as the context shows, only me. 
This holding together must be the opposite of 
those separations which selfishness is apt to pro- 
duce or occasion. Calvin says: constrains our 
hearts or affections; Meyer: holds us that we 
may not pass beyondthe limits which arerequired 
by a regard for God’s honor and your welfare 
(veo and ὑμῖν). The former interpretation seems 
indeed contrary to usage, since everywhere else 
the word has the meaning of, to press hard, or 
to afflict; but never, to urge or to impel; only 
in the passive is it used of the affections by 
which one is ruled. But why can not the active 
be used according to the analogy of the passive, 
of an affection which directly and thoroughly 
controls aman? With such a meaning the idea 
becomes more expressive. When the Apostle adds 
—we having formed this judgment—he in- 
troduces the subjective cause of that influence 
which the love of Christ had over him. That 
love had led him to form this judgment, ¢ 6., had 
brought him to this conclusion, to this convic- 
tion. Whether this judgment was reached at 
the time of his conversion (Meyer), or whether 
the whole meaning of the death of Christ became 
thus clear to his apprehension at some later 
period of his life (Osiander), may be left undeter- 
mined. Neander remarks that ‘‘the aorist was 
here used because Paul intended to speak of 
something which happened once upon a time. 
He means, that ever since he became conscious 
of the saving love of Christ, a new principle of 
conduct had entered his heart.” The substance 
of this conviction, or rather of the judgment then 
formed was:—that one died for all, and so 
all died.—If we accept of the reading of the 
Receptus,which gives us εἰ after ὅτε, we must re- 
gard ὅτι ἄρα---ἀπέϑανον as belonging together: 

that (if one died for all) then all died. The hy- 
pothetical sentence, however, could have been 
only formally problematical, since what is there 
expressed must have been really certain to the 
Apostle. But if εἰ be left out, ὅτε is either equi- 
valent to: . because, and so introduces the antece- 
dent of a proposition (Meyer); or, it is.in this 
instance equivalent to: that, and both. clauses. 
depend upon it, ὦ. 6., we have judged: that one 
died for all and that all died. (Osiander). Τοῦτ᾽ 

appears to favor this latter supposition (we judged. 
this that, etc.). One thing, however, which. 
would go far to determine us in favor of the cau- 
sal signification is, that it brings out more pro- 
minently the οἱ πάντες ἀπέϑανον as the proper: 
substance of the judgment to which the Apostle 
says in the context he had come (we judged this, . 
that one died for all and so all died). And yet 
the whole force of the sentence seems to require: 
that ὅτε in the sense of that should be made to: 
govern both clauses of it. This logical relation, 
however, would be destroyed if we thus bring 
in an independent conclusion by means of dpa. 
The inference which the Apostle makes from the: 


90 





proposition that one died for all, argues strongly 
in favor of its judicially vicarious signification. 
One was in the place of all, therefore all must be 
looked upon as dead; one has made expiation 
for the offence of all, therefore all are to be 
looked upon as having suffered punishment. 
This usage, by which ὑπέρ indicates that some- 
thing was done or suffered in the name of some 
one, in consequence of which the latter is re- 
garded as doing or suffering the same thing, 
prevailed even among classic writers; but among 
later authors the usage was extended until the 
word was introduced in connections in which a 
purer style would have required ἀντί, (Passow 
8. v. ὑπέρ, A. IL 1. p. 2064 a. b.), [Stanley con- 
tends that although ὑπὲρ πάντων has the same. 
ambiguity as the English ‘‘for,” ‘in behalf of,’ 
the idea of service and protection always pre- 
dominates. Wherever, in speaking of the death 
of Christ, the idea of substitution is intended, it is 
under the figure of a ransom, in which case it is 
expressed by ἀντί. (Μίαν. xx, 28; Mark x. 45), 
Wherever the idea of covering or forgiving sins 15 
intended, it is under the figure of a sin-offering, 
in which case the word used is wept ἁμαρτίας or 
ἁμαρτιῶν, as in Rom. viii. 3; 1 Pet. iii. 18; 1 
Jno. ii. 2; iv. 10. The preposition περί, as thus 
used, has partly the sense of ‘‘on account of,’ 
but chiefly the sense of ‘‘covering,” as if it were, 
he threw his death ‘‘ over” or “ around our sins.” 
Such generalizations contain a truth deserving 
notice, but we may doubt whether the usage was 
so strictly conformed to the etymological law. 
In the actual interpretation of our passage Stan- 
ley is compelled to confess that there would be 
no force to the Apostle’s inference that all were 
dead because Christ died, except on the idea of 
Christ’s representing or standing in the place of 
those who died with Him. See some excellent 
remarks of Trench (Synn. 2 Series, pp. 163-166) 
and Tischendorf, Doctr. Pauli de vi mor. Chr.]. 
But as in the final sentence (ver. 15) ὑπὲρ πάντων 
would belong also to ἐγερϑέντι, such a meaning 
would not seem appropriate to the connection, 
for we should be compelled to understand the 
resurrection for all in a sense like that which is 
expressed in Eph. ii. 5 (comp. Col. ii. 11; iii. 1), 
i. ¢., Christ’s resurrection would be regarded as 
the resurrection of all. Not only the final sen- 
tence (ver. 15) but that from which the whole 
reflection is derived (**the love of Christ con- 
strains us”) would probably bring us to the con- 
clusion that the main idea of the passage is, Love 
is for love, ἢ, e., corresponding to the love which 
sacrifices itself for the salvation of all, is a love 
which renounces all selfish motives and devotes 
itself to the great purpose of the other love. In 
such a connection the phrase all died would de- 
note a moral death. The Apostle implies that 
an essential object aimed at in the sacrifice of 
one for the redemption of all, was that the latter 
might forsake the fleshly life of sin which was 
opposed to this work of love, and which by its 
very nature was a life of selfishness, having self 
for its central aim, and in direct contradiction 
to this self-sacrificing and diffusive love. Ols- 
hausen says: that death of Christ for all is the 
principle or reason for the death of all for Him. 


But when any have fellowship with Christ this | other moral. 


woe. ae 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





sakes becomes actually beneficial to them, and 
they cease to live for themselves. This is what 
the Apostle means in other places, when he says, 
we arecrucified with Christ, Gal. ii. 19; comp. Col. 
iii. 3; ii. 12; Rom. vi. 4. The Apostle speaks of 
believers who in the very act of faith have en- 
tered into the fellowship of Christ’s death, and 
hence are dead with Him, and are in the sphere 
of His death, because they have the essential prin- 
ciple of that death in a love which surrenders its 
personal life of selfishness. (comp. Meyer). 
would not be understood as defending that inter- 
pretation, which combines and mingles together 
the subjective ethical and the objective judicial 
signification of Christ’s atoning death, or which 
makes out that all are both morally and legally 
dead by virtue and in consequence of Christ’s 
death. (Osiander). The only explanation which 
seems to us correct, and to which the whole con- 
nection (ver. 13-15) conducts us, is that which 
represents the death of Christ, which brings sal- 
vation to all, as set forth in this passage, ac- 
cording to its ethical meaning, but as a result 
of love in Him and as a reason for love in men. 


We © 


Neander says: The article before révre¢ implies — 


that precisely the all for whom Christ died must 
have died in Him. That which had been as- 
sumed as a principle in ver. 14 (‘he all died), is 
presented in ver. 15 as a purpose or aim, [It 
should, however, be remarked that the purpose 
is limited to those who live (οἱ ζῶντες), whereas 
no limitation is put to the all (οἱ πάντες) for 
whom Christ died, and who died in Him. See 
below]. The Apostle speaks of this living of 
some as a moral result flowing from the death of 
Christ for all:—that they who live should 
no longer live for themselves.—He here 
resumes the thought involved in the being dead. 
In that dying the fleshly life of sin had ceased, 
the man no more lived to himself, the object of 
all his action was no longer a life of sense in the 
service of self alone. The positive side in con- 
trast with this is given when the Apostle adds— 
but to him who died and rose again for 
them—i. e., Christ who had died and risen 
again for their salvation (Rom. iv. 25) should 
now become the object of all their efforts. But 
the subjects of what is here spoken of are said 
to be οἱ ζῶντες. These are such as have entered 
into the fellowship of Christ’s death; but, as the 
invariable consequence, are also in the fellow- 
ship of his new life: ἐκ νεκρῶν ζῶντες. Comp. 
Rom. vi. 4 ff. 18. We regard as defective not 
only the interpretation which renders ὁὲ ζῶντες 
as long as they live (for the article forbids 
such a rendering), but also that which regards 
it as meaning those who are alive 7. ¢., those 
who are conceived of as a part of the same 
general multitude who had been redeemed 
and were dead. [It is precisely on account 
of the article before ζῶντες that we think 
the Apostle intended to emphasize and distin- 
guish the living here from the more general 
mass for whom Christ died. Those who make 
the living in Christ as extensive and the same as 
those for whom He died, are obliged to take the 
word died (ἀποθανεῖν) in ver. 15 in two different 
significations, one judicial or literal, and the 
If on the other hand we make the 


is effected by a faith in which His death for their | death in ver. 15 in each case to mean a legal 


Pa: 


CHAP. V. 11-21. 


oo 


death, then the living signifies the opposite justi- 
fication; or if we make it signify a physical 
death, then the living must be such as partake 
in His resurrection and are alive in Him who rose 
again (ἀποθαν. k. ἐγερθέντι). We may also ask, 
how it follows from Christ’s dying in any sense, 
that all or any would die in a moral sense? Is 
not this making the Apostle assert a mere as- 
sumption? Our English A. V. makes the Apos- 
tle to have judged, that if one died for all, then 
all must have been dead. This is contrary to the 
aorist tense of ἀπέθανον which signifies literally 
they died. Even with the sense that His death 
proved that all were dying creatures, we cannot 
see how such an argument was pertinent to the 
Apostle’s line of thought. His object was not 
to refer to the original’ state of man without re- 
demption, but to the obligations which that re- 
demption imposed on him. Even those who deny 
that the dying of all men in consequence of 
Christ’s death was merely by imputation (Web- 
ster and Wilkinson), acknowledge that His death 
indicated what was due to them, and condemned 
them unto death; and that the interest of the δὲ 
ζῶντες extended to the resurrection, as well as 
to the death of Christ. Comp. Stanley]. τ °° 

Vers. 16, 17.—So that we from thi 15 Con- 
know no man according to + ¢Presenta- 
—An inference is here drawn f:~ 7/26 In ἃ yet 
just been said. Inasmuchas (*: XY 10; 1 Tim. 
all, and so their selfish life ~100 18 not necessary. 
clusiveness, narrowness, et, With ver. 19.—Be- 
and inasmuch as believ+Ciling a world unto 
who has died for them ©": !)).—We have here an 
be entirely devoted tc#80" for what had just been 
forth we must be 6.9.4 (θεός) stands so emphati- 
ever he may be. "ἵ the sentence as to indicate a 
σάρκα). The σάρ' all this preparatory work, and 
which believers2ence of it. Shall we now take 
To know acco* 2068 i” Christ, as if they consti- 
either subjec®°e by itself, and regard the whole 
those here -Serting that the work of atonement 
man witho!ished by the Divine being in Christ, 
PATE aodhead of Christ (comp. Col. i. 19 ff.) 
pai, seat would signify the Father (others 
.t mean the λόγος, and still others the 
merely’ 0d), and_eivas ἐν would designate an 


and ett ot merely 


ul and substantial presence, and not mer 
knowSient_dynamic fellowship (Osiander). 


Or 
no con@iaAddceor-an emphatic _periphrastic im- 
Jewirct (as in Gal i238), by which Paul wished 
i ings God was acting; 
Christ died, reconciling 


ing the 


ofl 
cum 
«yf, that God was when 


whi World unto Himself; 7 6. God was in the 
wetk ὦ ist,—i i Let which 
no © Worldwas-reconei nd_especially 


p2 that great event in which Christ died to atone 
{or the world (the καταλλάξαι of ver. 18, Meyer)? 
elur decision upon+these questions must depend 
poy much upon what we find in the succeeding 
nontext. According to Meyer, Paul is in that 
m)ntext assigning the reasons which had induced 
yrim to say that God was reconciling the world. 
These are giyen wl is Ἐπὶ ~God-was_not 
imputing to_men their trespasses, ἀπά ἢ had com- 
mitted to him and his fellow laborers the word 
of reconciliation ; from both which it was evident 
that God was in Christ’s work engaged in a 
{shen to reconcile the whole world unto Him- 


\ 
/ \ 








sion to a lower Christolegical view? In) 





97 


------.--.ο-. .ττττττττττττὯρἃὯἷ͵ἷ͵͵ . 


ἀλλά has the sense of nevertheless, as in chap. 
iv. 16. He acknowledges he had once had a 
knowledge of Christ according to the flesh (the 
emphasis should be placed upon the praeterite 
ἐγνώκαμεν, which on this account is placed first in 
the sentence) ; but he asserts that for the present, 
now (νῦν, comp. ἀπὸ τοῦ viv in the preceding 
clause), he knew Christ thus (7. 6., κατὰ arta) no 
longer. The emphasis cannot besfi Aon, 
Χριστόν on account of its position swas treated- 
tion between the protasis and the sen up to the 
sentence. [In such a case ypror> interpreta- 
stood before κατὰ σάρκα]. But κι΄ >. consistent 
objectively, refers to the merely,“"© ~* (τὸν μὴ 
lity, that which made its appe Mf Εἶν δ καιο- 
This defines what kind of knov!ing act, a 399, 
to, and consequently also bby Fenian is 
ing Christ which was in ἡ him, an element... 


which had preceded hb: Wever, be conceded, the 
enment when he “eyer connects the participial 


(Χριστόν her~ ἦν καταλλάσσ. (‘‘it is evident that 
an ap-- ‘ee¢onciling the world unto Himself, 
cuuch as He does not impute,” eéc.), has 


1umething rather artificial about it. Such a con- | 


nection of the words would have been proper 
only if the Apostle had said, God 7s reconciling 
the world, or if he had continued by saying, 
God did not impute (imperfect) to men their 
trespasses. On the whole we think it best with 
Meyer to take ἦν---καταλλάσσων together, but to 
regard the participial sentence as a more par- 
ticular description of the way in which God was 
reconciling the world to Himself in Christ, ‘God 
was in Christ, (a phrase equivalent to by (διὰ) 
Jesus Christ in ver. 18, but with the understand- 
ing that Christ and what He has done are the only 
basis on which the reconciliation is founded), 
bringing back the world to a state of friendship 
with Himself; for He imputed not men’s sins to 
them, and He has committed unto us the word of 
reconciliation.”” Not imputing men’s trespasses 
to them is equivalent to the bestowal of forgive- 
ness upon men, and implies that God was apply- 
ing the benefits of salvation by Christ to indi- 
viduals (αὐτοῖς). This is set forth by means of- 
a present participle (imperf. Winer, ¢ 46), be- 
cause the act was continuously to be repeated, 
while the word describing the institution of the 
ministerial office (ϑέμενος), is an aorist participle, 
because the act was accomplished at a certain 
time. But the reconciliation, or the restoration 
of the happy relation, which was the consequence 
of this proceeding, is mentioned as a process 
commenced in Christ but not as yet concluded 
(ἦν----καταλλάσσων). As we do not think that this 
refers exclusively to the objective facts of the re- 
deeming work, the objection which de Wette 
urges, that καὶ ϑέμενος, etc., is not an expression 
quite suitable to those facts [inasmuch as it 
implies that they were put into the mouth or 


heart (see below) ] will not apply to us. Kéopoc,,/ 


as in Jno. 111. 25 et al., signifies the human 
race, and as it is here without the article, 
it means perhaps ‘‘a whole world.” The word 
trespasses (παραπτώματα), as in Rom. iii. 25, 
signifies faults, sins, aberrations from the right 
way, from the truth, from rectitude, eée. [Trench, 
Synn. 2d ser. p. 76]. Hath committed to us the 
word of reconciliation signifies, according to some, 
that God had established and arranged the 


A 


i 
Sf 


98 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ence to what he was before he became a Chris- 
tian (subjectively or objectively). The phrase, 

a new creature, occurs again in Gal. vi. 15. In 
relation to the thing itself comp. Eph. ii. 10; iv. 
21; Col. iii. 9 f.; Rom. vi. 6. The new birth is 
spoken of in Tit. iii. 5; John iii. 3; James 1, 18. 
Kriov designates not only a Divine act (creation), 
but wWas.the product of such an act (creature). 
Thin cons: is the ordinary meaning in the New 
ded as dovomp. Rom. i. 25; viii. 19 ff. 39 et al). 
prevailed even: was also used by the Rabbins 
later authors tho a conversion to Judaism. The 
word was introdureature is carried out in an anti- 


purer style woula the following sentence—Old | 


8. v. ὑπέρ, A. IL 1. 1ssed away—that is, with re- 


tends that althouglo are in Christ. The old things | 


ambiguity as the E:sition and (theoretically) the 
the idea of service anc one had before he became 
dominates. Wherever, in sjtute the whole mental 
of Christ, the idea of substitution vised in all things. 
under the figure of a ransom, in whivelonged to us 
expressed by ἀντί. (Matth. xx, 28; Mark X-r., pp. 
Wherever the idea of covering or forgiving sinsves: 


This great change the Apostle now proceeds ἐσ 
refer to its original principle. [Os1anper: ‘he 
mounts from this idea of the new creation to 
God the source of all life, and traces the mental 
change of which he had been speaking to the 
great fundamental improvement of all human 
relations by the atonement of Christ”’]. 

Vers. 18, 19. And all things [are] of 
God.—The ‘all things” of which he had just 
spoken, the whole state in which the old nature 
and life had passed away and every thing had 
become new, comes to us from God. The way, 
however, in which this occurs, is immediately 
described more definitely by directing our minds 
to the manner in which God effects such a 
change—who reconciled us to Himself by 
Christ—Kara/Adccevy, according to one class of 
interpreters is simply the accomplishment in 
man’s disposition toward God, of a change in 
which he gives up his dislike and his distrust of 
God; but according to another class, it is a 
change in God’s treatment of men, in which He 
no longer regards them with disfavor, and causes 


intended, it is under the figure of a sin-offering,’ 
in which case the word used is wept ἁμαρτίας or 
ἁμαρτιῶν, as in Rom. viii. ὃ; 1 Pet. iii. 18; 1 
Jno. ii. 2; iv. 10. The preposition περί, as thus 
used, has partly the sense of ‘‘on account of,” 
but chiefly the sense of ‘‘covering,” as if it were, 
he threw his death ‘‘ over” or ‘‘ around our sins.” 
Such generalizations contain a truth deserving 
notice, but we may doubt whether the usage was 
so strictly conformed to the etymological law. 
In the actual interpretation of our passage Stan- 
ley is compelled to confess that there would be 
no force to the Apostle’s inference that all were 
dead because Christ died, except on the idea of 
Christ’s representing or standing in the place of 
those who died with Him. See some excellent 
remarks of Trench (Synn. 2 Series, pp. 1638-166) 
and Tischendorf, Doctr. Pauli de vi mor. Chr.]. 
But as in the final sentence (ver. 15) ὑπὲρ πάντων 
would belong also to ἐγερϑέντι, such a meaning 
would not seem appropriate to the connection, 
for we should be compelled to understand the 
resurrection for all in a sense like that which is 
expressed in Eph. ii. 5 (comp. Col. ii. 11; iii. 1), 
i. e., Christ’s resurrection would be regarded as 
the resurrection of all. Not only the final sen- 
tence (ver. 15) but that from which the whole 
reflection is derived (**the love of Christ con- 
strains us”) would probably bring us to the con- 
clusion that fhe main idea of the passage is, Love 
is for love, 7. e., corresponding to the love which 
sacrifices itself for the salvation of all, is a love 
which renounces all selfish motives and deyotes 
itself to the great purpose of the other love. In 
such a connection the phrase all died would de- 
note a moral death. The Apostle implies that 
an essential object aimed at in the sacrifice of 
one for the redemption of all, was that the latter 
might forsake the fleshly life of sin which was 
opposed to this work of love, and which by its 
very nature was a life of selfishness, having self 
for its central aim, and in direct contradiction 
to this self-sacrificing and diffusive love. Ols- 
hausen says: that death of Christ for allis the 
principle or reason for the death of all for Him. 


But when any have fellowship with Christ this | other moral. 
is effected by a faith in which His death for their | death in ver. 15 in each case to mean a legal 





e| His wrath (ὀργή) towards them to cease, and 
N they become His beloved ones instead of enemies 
that jmp. Rom. v. 10; Col. i. 20 f.). According to 
have dietter view, it includes what is meant by 
sumed as a’ayor to them (χαρίζεσθαι) and forgive- 
presented in Vedévac τὰς ἁμαρτίας) ; and the result 
should, however, b.his side returns to a state of 
is limited to those wh/comp. Rom. vy. 1 ff.; vi. 1 ff. ; 
no limitation is put toe views might, however, be 
whom Christ died, and WAd&a:, so that the idea 
below]. The Apostle spean of a state of friend- 
some as a moral result flowin, but with the under- 
Christ for all:—that they wion of grace is first 
no longer live for themseéVNeander remarks: 
resumes the thought involved in toan’s enemy, but 
In that dying the fleshly life of sind is everlasting 
the man no more lived to himself,! nothing like 
all his action was no longer a life of Srom God has 
service of self alone. The positive sil must be 
trast with this is given when the Apost’ communi- 
but to him who died and rose δὲ And yet 
them—i. ¢., Christ who had died anno means 
again for their salvation (Rom. iv. 25) an’s dis- 
now become the object of all their efforts.t of an 
the subjects of what is here spoken of are When 
to be ot ζῶντες. These are such as have entides a 
into the fellowship of Christ’s death; but, as place 
invariable consequence, are also in the fehrk of 
ship of his new life: ἐκ νεκρῶν ζῶντες. Coi) the 
Rom. vi. 4 ff. 18. We regard as defective i de- 
only the interpretation which renders ὁὲ Cévnase 
as long as they live (for the article forbingh 
such a rendering), but also that which regarded 
it as meaning those who are alive ὃν ¢., thosta 
who are conceived of as a part of the same» 
general multitude who had been redeemed 
and were dead. [It is precisely on accountst 
of the article before ζῶντες that we thinleg 
the Apostle intended to emphasize and distin-g 
guish the living here from the more generahe 
mass for whom Christ died. Those who make « 
the living in Christ as extensive and the same as 
those for whom He died, are obliged to take the 
word died (ἀποθανεῖν) in ver. 15 in two different 
significations, one judicial or literal, and the 
If on the other hand we make the 





CHAP. V. 11-21. 





tion ἃ effected by the death of Christ) seem to 
hint a’ Ὁ at thisidea. And yet we see no injury 
but rather a great benefit to theological exegesis 
if xaraAAayh could be uniformly distinguished 
from ἱλασμός and its kindred words, and confined 
to that part of the redeeming work by which man 
is reconciled (whatever may be the means, objec- 
tive or subjective) toGod. OnsHauseNn on Rom. 
iii. 24; Sranzey’s Obss. on the result of our pas- 
sage; C. F. Scumin’s Bibl. Theol. Vol. 11. p. 316 ff. 
Exsrarp’s Chr. Dogm. ἢ 406]. But the phrase by 
Christ refers to something which becomes more 
distinctly prominent in ver. 21 (not by means of 
his doctrine or his example. Pelag). The pro- 
noun ws (ἡμᾶς) signifies not the Apostles exclu- 
sively, but believers generally; for there is no 
limitation implied until the nature of the subject 
calls for a limitation in the next sentence—and 
hath given to us the ministration of the 
reconciliation.—This ministration of the re- 
conciliation is analogous to the ministration of 
righteousness, in chap. iii. 9. It is a ministry 
entirely devoted to the work of reconciliation, 
whose business it is to make known that recon- 
ciliation, and in consequence of which men be- 
lieve in Christ. To detine this ministry so as to 
make it include all believers (Olshausen) is con- 
trary to the whole analogy of Paul’s representa- 
tion. One might much rather take ἡμᾶς in a yet 
more limited sense (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 10; 1 Tim. 
i. 12 ff.); but such a construction is not necessary. 
nor would it be consistent with ver. 19.—Be- 
cause God was reconciling a world unto 
_ himself in Christ (ver. 1')).—We have here an 
explanation and a reason for what had just been 
said. The word God (θεός) stands so emphati- 
cally at the head of the sentence as to indicate a 
Divine agency in all this preparatory work, and 
a special prominence of it. Shall we now take 
the words God was in Christ, as if they consti- 
tuted a sentence by itself, and regard the whole 
verse as asserting that the work of atonement 
was accomplished by the Divine being in Christ, 


or by the Godhead of Christ (comp. Col. i. 19 ff.)| 


in opposition to a lower Christological view? In) 
this case God would signify the Father (others: 
make it mean the λόγος, and still others the 


Triune God), πα εἶναι ἐν would designate an 


habitual ot merely 


te lepers cat nes 
a transient_dynamic fellowship (Osiander). 


Or 
is ἦν katadddseov-an emphatic_periphrastic im- 
perfect (as in Paul wished 


Gal. 1. 23), by which 
to 1. δας πα inet ings God wae acting 
viz., that God was when Christ died, reconciling 
the world unto Himself; 7 e. God was in the 
work of Christ, in that series of-aels_by which 


the w nd_especially 
in that great event in which Christ died to Biche 


for the world (the καταλλάξαι of ver. 18, Meyer)? 
Our decision upon-these questions must depend 
Ὑ much upon what we find in the si 


ver ucceeding 
context. According to Meyer, Paul is in that 
context assigning the reasons which had induced 
him to say that God was reconciling the world. 
These are giyen when iissaid that-God-was not 
. imputing to-_men their trespasses, and_had ¢ com- 

mi to him and his fellow laborers the word 
of reconciliation ; from both which it was evident 
. ‘that God was in Christ’s work engaged in a 
_ scheme to reconcile the whole world unto Him- 














101 








self. The words μὴ λογιζόμενος hax 
averb in the p1 present tense, for they pace: 7 
is not reckoning unto-men their 1 


the other hand the committing to ee 
reconciliation was what God did in zy πᾷ find 
work to men, after it had been accoy’ beginnin 

Christ. Even Osiander concedes that beginning 
tences are not to be codrdinated with bu: f 


nated to καταλλάσσων, etc., and that μὴ ἢ nen 2 


describes a result which rai = was treated 
and nearly coincident with the .¢) up to the 


This is the remission of guilt, a be., τ interpreta- 
dividuals may receive through faith, . consistent 
municate which is the object of the Di (τὸν μὴ 
tution of the ministry (καὶ ϑέμενος, διὰ 5) καιο- 
yet this result of the reconciling act, as 399, 
organ so indispensable to its realization in loys 
viduals, is not, according to him, an element., 
part of it. It must, however, be conceded, th: 
the way in which Meyer connects the participial 
sentence with ἦν καταλλάσσ. (‘it is evident that 
God is reeonciling the world unto Himself, 
inasmuch as He does not impute,” eic.), has 
something rather artificial about it. Such a con- 
nection of the words would have been proper 
only if the Apostle had said, God 7s reconciling | 
the world, or if he had continued by saying, 
God did not impute (imperfect) to men their 
trespasses. On the whole we think it best with 
Meyer to take ἦν---καταλλάσσων together, but to 
regard the participial sentence as a more par- 
ticular description of the way in which God was 
reconciling the world to Himself in Christ, “God 
was in Christ, (a vhrase equivalent to by (διὰ) 
Jesus Christ in ver. 18, but with the understand- 
ing that Christ and what He has done are the only 
basis on which the reconciliation is founded), 
bringing back the world to a state of friendship 
with Himself; for He imputed not men’s sins to 
them, and He has committed unto us the word of 
reconciliation.”” Not imputing men’s trespasses 
to them is equivalent to the bestowal of forgive- 
ness upon men, and implies that God was apply- 
ing the benefits of salvation by Christ to indi- 
viduals (αὐτοῖς). This is set forth by means of- 
a present participle (imperf. Winer, ¢ 46), be- 
cause the act was continuously to be repeated, 
while the word describing the institution of the 
ministerial office (ϑέμενος), is an aorist participle, 
because the act was accomplished at a certain 
time. But the reconciliation, or the restoration 
of the happy relation, which was the consequence 
of this proceeding, is mentioned as a process 
commenced in Christ but not as yet concluded 
(ἦν---καταλλάσσων). As we do not think that this 
refers exclusively to the objective facts of the re- 
deeming work, the objection which de Wette 
urges, that καὶ ϑέμενος, etc., is not an expression 
quite suitable to those facts [inasmuch as it 
implies that they were put into the mouth or 
heart (see below) ] will not apply to us. Kéoyoc,,/ 
as in Jno. ili. 26 e¢ al., signifies the human 
race, and as it is here without the article, 
it means perhaps ‘‘a whole world.” The word 
trespasses (παραπτώματα), as in Rom. 111. 26, ὦ 
signifies faults, sins, aberrations from the right 
way, from the truth, from rectitude, ee. [Trench, 
Synn. 2d ser. p. 76]. Hath committed to us the 
word of reconciliation signifies, according to some, 
that God had established and arranged the 


/ 
ff 


98 





ence to whatthe Christian faith in the Church, 
tian (subjectiulgated the doctrine of reconcilia- 
a new creaturé unmistakable reference of this ex- 
relation to thyhat had been said in ver. 18, re- 
21; Col. iiiz giving of the ministry of reconcilia- 
spoken of VApostle, induces us to understand the 
Κτίσις deg' by ἡμῖν. [The use of the aorist parti- 
but Wie.wevoc, here, is remarkable. We “phould 
THin con: ted καὶ ἔθετο, and a slight anacolu- 
Irded as doe denied (Olshausen). The word 


prevailed even i%anected back with θεὸς ἦν, since 


later authors thection of an aorist part, with- 
word was intticle and an imperfect verb, would 
purer styleonly without an example but with- 
8. v. drépappropriate sense (God hath committed to 
tends tr deposited in us, eéc.). Our English version 
ambigumes that this phrase (θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν) sig- 
the ities, hath committed or intrusted to us, or laid 
dopon us, the work of preaching the outward 
‘ word of reconciliation. And yet the phrase is 

so peculiar that we cannot but look for an addi- 

tional and a deeper meaning. Beza long ago 

finely r»mirked, that “among the | Hebrews one 
was said to put words in the mouth of another 
who used his agency in making something known 
to others. But when this formula is applied to 
God it has a special emphasis, and signifies that 
the heart is impelled and the tongue is directed 
by the Lord to speak in a particular way, and 
that the person is chosen by God and authorized 
to speak in the name of God.” From the force 
of the middle voice, we infer that the Apostle 
speaks of the mental act or purpose of God, ra- 
ther than of the external ordination of the Apos- 
tles (Jelf’s Gram. ἢ 3863, Winer, 3 89, 2); or as 
Wordsworth prefers to take it, in a more special 
sense reflexively: ‘‘having deposited for Him- 
self the treasures of His grace in us, as in vessels 
chosen for that purpose, earthen and fragile 
though we be’]. The _w ould 


le words ϑδσθαι ἐν wi 
then mean, to put intethe mouth (Ex. iv. 15), 
or to put within us, to inspire us that we may 


communicate it to “others [not, however to the 
entire exclusion of the idea of a more exter- 
nal intrusting of the Gospel to us]. With re- 
_ spect to the impropriety, for grammatical rea- 
sons, of connecting ϑέμενος with ἦν, comp. Meyer. 
The word (λόγος) of reconciliation in this pas- 
sage is similar to ὁ λόγος Tov σταυροῦ (the word 
of the cross) in 1 Cor. i. 18, and it signifies 
here the word, the substance of which is the re- 
conciliation. The particles ὡς ὅτε are equivalent 
here to wtpote quod (seeing that, because, for, in ἃ 
very different connection from the same words 
in chap. xi. 21), and connect our passage with 
chap. i. 18. Everything is represented as pro- 
ceeding from God, ‘*who has reconciled us to 
Himself by Christ.” For God in Christ has truly 
entered upon a process by which He is reconcil- 
ing the world. * He makes believers perceive in 
their own experience that God has reconciled 
them to Himself by Jesus Christ; He brings them 
into the state of reconciliation which He has 
established with the world.” 









proc o describe further the method in which 
this was effec ‘ras relates to its 8. general 
principles. 


Or, rather, he givesthe-reasorfor 
hat 


the assertion, t 16 change mentioned in ver. 






God, who had receuciled believers to Himself 













THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





through Christ. In this way he bringee before 
us the vast extent of the Divine agency iirsaying 
men. Inasmuch as God in Christ exercised such 
a comprehensive agency, that great change must 
be referred to the same God who was reconciling - 
us to Himself by Christ. 

Vers. 20, 21.—In behalf of Christ bess 
we are ambassadors, as though God werel 
exhorting by us.—[*‘It is indeed doubtfu 
whether γὰρ, for, belongs to the text, as it is omit- 
ted in many of the oldest. manuscripts. Its 
omission only renders the transition more ab 
rupt, for the relation of the passage remains the 
same.”’ Hopar]. The particle οὖν (then, there-e< 
fore) refers to that which had been said in the 
preceding verse. [As God is reconciling men 
and hath committed to us the work of reconciling 
men, 1 turn to you Corinthians as a part of the 
community to whom [I am sent, and as partially 
unrecovered or strayed from the right way, an 
I commence my work with you]. “The words, w 
are ambassadors for Christ, imply as their logi 
cal antecedent that the ministry of reconciliatio 
had been committed to them (ver. 18).) The r 
conciliation (καταλλ.} was in fact communicate 
to men through Christ, and had its origin in Hi 
(vers. 18 f.): and of course it was Christ’s caus: 
which the Apostles represented among men. The 
verb πρεσβεύειν signifies to be a messenger 
(‘*sometimes merely to deliver a message to ano- 
ther without being empowered to do any thing — 
more than to explain or enforce it.” BLoom- 


FIELD). It_is fouad—atsoin—Eph.-yi-20. The 
preposition ὑπερ signifies here, not instead of - 


(Luther), but_in r, and es- 
pecially in behalf of Him whoi is the Mediator and 
Author of the reconciliation. It refers to those 
to whom the ministry of this reconciliation’ had 
been committed, and through whose ageney this 
reconciliation was to be effected and Christ was 
to be glorified. From the same fact that it was 
G f es_the 
word of reconciliation, it followed further that 
when those Apostles fulfilled their commission, 
it was as though God exhorted by means of them. 


Lee Bae SET hig = Son to be- 
seech and be His Ambassador unto mankind. 


When then He was slain and gone, we succeeded 
to the embassy, and in His stead and the Father’s 
we beseech you’’]. It is implied here that in 
our work as messengers We stand in the place of 
God; our exhortation should be looked upon as 
given by God through us; or we perform the 
duties of our office with the feeling that it is God 
who addresses or admonishes men through us. 
This participial sentence, however, may be easily 
connected with what follows: as though God did 
beseech you by us, we pray you, δίς. But as the 
complete sense of this participial expression can 
be understood only by means of ὑπεῤ Χριστοῦ, it 
seems more appropriate to connect it with that 
which precedes it. But even then the idea of 
substitution is not the only one which is suita- 

le. The prayer which the Apostle utters is 
presented in behalf of Christ in the sense just 
explained. We pray on Christ's behalf: 
Be reconciled to God.— We_pray-. (δεόμεθα) 
is the language of the most conc escending love 


Shas ae eR δὴν eae τούτο is that they , 
would be God. This is a most ur-) 


gent appeal to those-who had ποὺ yet believed in 


! 
: 


. 


[ 


CHAP. V. 11-21 


—_— 


Christ, or participated in the blessings of salva- 
tion (not to those who had already believed, and 
for the purpose of exciting them to continued ad- 
vances in repentance and faith). [Dr. Hodge re- 
marks that the word καταλλάγητε is in the passive 
Voice, and cannot mean, ‘ Reconcile yourselves;’ 
hut, ‘Be reconciled, embrace the offer of the re- 
yiliation.’ C. F. Scumrp (Bibl. Theol. Vol. 
al., p. 318) notices that the word has here not 
medial but a passive signification, implying 
ake tnsve merely to accepts an influence or act 
of God, under which we were originally passive. 
Thy t ἐ ts of the Divine 
4, and in ceasing to_be tl these we become re- 
conci ording to the way in which 
we translate the words, ‘Reconcile yourselves, or 
be ye reconciled (comp. Rom. y. 10), or, allow 
yourselves to be reconciled,’ the meaning must 
be, ‘Accept the reconciliation God has extended 
to you by Christ, accept what He presents to 
you, take the hand of reconciliation He reaches 
forth to you.’ - The Apostle in this passage evi- 
dently had no thought of a reconciliation of 
themselves by laying aside the minding of the 
flesh and putting on the minding of the Spirit 
(Riickert). Such a process was looked upon by 
him as merely the necessary result of the recon- 
ciliation; or the application of the reconciliation 
by means of faith (comp. Meyer, Osiander). 
Him who knew not sin He made to be 
sin for us (ver. 21). According to the true 
reading of the text, the Apostle here introduces 
Without a connecting particle “γάρ (asyndeton), a 
motiv eaders to com- 
ply with_his—prayer—or_exhortation. ᾿ς This was 
the wor love omplished 
in Christ for effecting reconciliation. Now en- 
ters the notjon of the ἱλασμός, the propitiation. 
Comp. Rom. iii. 25; viii. 3; 1 John ii. 2; iv. 10; 
Heb. ii. 17. By τὸν μὴ γνόυτα ἁμαρτίαν he means 
Christ in His μου ρος, sinlessness (what Chrysos- 


tom calls in the positive sense τὸν αὐτοδικαιοσύνην 


/ 





ὄντα), He who knows no sin, to whose, internal | 


nature or outward action all, contradiction,to. God 

or departure from, the Divine.will,was.a complete 

stranger, altogether. beyond, His. personal expe- 

rience or consciousness. The 

[instead of οὐ] not by the participle with the ar- 

ticle (comp. 1 Pet. ii. 10; Eph. v. 4), but it ex- 

presses to 
(the mind, 7. 6., in the representation of the mind 
itself. [ Winer’ 8s Gram., 359, 3 6.]. This may 
be in the mind of men (1, 6., in the minds of 
Christians); in which case it says of Christ that 
we Christians regard Him as One who knew no 
sin, or it may refer to the mind of God, and so it 
tells us how Christ appeared before the Divine 
mind., As God is here the subject cf the Apos- 
tle’s remarks, the latter is undoubtedly the cor- 
rect interpretation. 
weis, Vol. II., 36, says: ‘*God has made Him in 
His sinlessness to be sin. It is from this denial 
of sin in Christ according to the Divine judgment 
that we must explain the use of the relative ne- 
zative particle.” W. 
ess Being was made_ sin vde_sin_for_ us (ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν 
ὁμαρτίαν ἐποιήσεν), ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν stands first. to_give 
it more forge; and it seems very natural to take 
the phrase i in the sense of a substitution. And 
yet this is not absolutely necessary, nor does it 


x 


Hofmann in his Schriftbe- 


in- 












101 





--------------- ὦ 


seem quite appropriate in both instances in which 
the word is here used, since God could not make 
us sin at first, inasmuch as we were in our own 
selves sinners. The#<éa is here therefore to be 
taken as equivalent to: for our good, and finds 
its explanation in the final sentence beginning 
with iva. The idea expressed-in-meking—Him-to 
bes sin must be that God made Him the bearer of 
sin when He suffered, inasmuch as by His suffer- 
ings and death as a malefactor He was treated 
as a sinner (ἁμαρτωλός), or was given up to the 
fate of those who were sinners. The interpreta- 
tion of ἁμαρτίαν as a sin offering is consistent 
neither with usage, with the context (τὸν μὴ 
γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν), nor with the contrast (dccaco- 
ovvm). Comp. Hofmann, Schriftbew., IL., p. 829. 
Sin becomes actualized in one in whom there is 
no sin, when he becomes a sinner in outward ap- 
pearance, though he is not soin reality. God 
allows sin to become an actual experience to him 
who has never committed it in fact. So was it 
with Christ when God determined He should ex- 
perience what befel Him. In like manner, Gal. 
iii. 13. If Paul had intended to say that God 
designed to set forth Christ as one in whom sin 
is concentrated and represented in its complete- 
ness, and with whom it is in certain respects 
identified (Osiander), he could do no better than 
to say, ‘‘He made our sins to be His.” The idea 
expressed in ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν is further carried out 
when it is added: that we might become, . 
God's righteousnessin Him.—The righicous- 
ness of God is probably equivalent to being 
righteous with God (δίκαιοι π παρὰ ϑεῷ); or, provided 
we take ϑεοῦ in the sense of ἐκ ϑεοῦ as in Phil. 
iii. 9, it would have the meaning of being madec~ 
righteous by God (δικαιωϑέντες ὑπὸ τοῦ ϑεοῦ). 
Ewald: ‘*we thus become in Christ (to use the 
old sacrificial language) a legal offering before 
God and well pleasing in His sight; an expres- 
sion much like what is used in chap. ii. 15.” 
From the nature of the case, a righteousness 
which came from God must’ be sufficient in His 
sight. Neander: ‘A perfect righteousness, the 
ideal of a holy life, like the sufferings in which 
this holy life was perfected, is given to our hu- 
manity. For all, and in the place of all, He has 
borne the burden of human guilt, and made this 
ideal a reality. All who enter into communion 
with Him appear in God’s sight δίκαιοι ἐν Χριστῷ 3. 
for their surrender into His hands is a pledge 
that this ideal of holiness will be actualized in 
them also.” [Chrysostom thinks that there was 
a profound reason for using the abstract for the 
concrete form here: ‘‘the word δικαιοσύνη ex- 
presses the unspeakable bounty of the gift; thas 
God hath not given us only the operation or ef- 
fect of His righteousness, but His very righteous- 
ness, His very self unto us. Paul does not Bay 
that God treated Christ as a sinner, but as sin,” 
the guulity itself ; in order that we might become 
not merely righteous men, but the righteousness of 
God in Him.” TheReceptus which our English » 
A. V. follows uses here the present (γινώμεϑα), 
instead of the aorist (γενώμεϑα)]. But as there 
is no reference to time in this place, and the ob- 
ject is to express the simple occurrence once for 
all time without regard to the instant of its ac- 
complishment, the aorist was preferable. There 
were also internal reasons for using a tense ap.” 


~~ 


102 


plicable to alltime. In ἐν αὐτῷ is expressed the 
fellowship with Christ which takes place by 
means of a faith which is by its nature a putting 
on of Christ. In fellowship with Him we become 
a righteousness of Gols Tor whoever is in Christ 
is looked upon by God as righteous, or as pos- 

_ sessed of a just title to life. Comp. on 1 Cor. i. 
80. The necessary fruit of this is holiness, but 
the two things are not to be confounded. (Hof 
mann, p. 230, says: ‘We become in Christ the 
righteousness of God, because we have it in His 
person. We need nothing else to make it ours 
than to share in His fellowship’’). 

[After all the efforts which have been made to 
show that this passage (τὸν μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν 
ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν duapt. ἐποίησεν) cannot mean that 
Christ bore the punishment of human sin, we 
cannot divest it of that essential signification. 
Granting that it does not mean strictly that 
Christ became an actual sinner, it surely signifies 
that He bore the consequences of sin, if not in the 
personal anger of God toward Himself, at least in 
being surrendered to the malice of evil beings, 
and to the endurance of those evils which God 
has decreed shall be the curse of actual sin. 
Why may we not then use the Scriptural lan- 
guage by saying He endures our curse, that is, 
the evils which are the ordinary curse of our 
-inful humanity? And why should we not say 
¥n strict accordance with our verse, that God’s 
object was that we might be delivered not only 
“from sin itself” (J. Youna, Life and Light of 
Men, p. 309 and 335), but ‘* from the punishment 
which is its necessary result;” yea, that we 
might be placed in the position of completely 
righteous persons, and not only ‘‘rightened in 
spirit,” but justified from all guilt and invested 
with all the benefits of righteousness? While 
with Billroth and Calvin, we may concede that 
ἁμαρτία cannot be strictly rendered a sin-offering 
(for which Paul gives us no example in his ac- 
knowledged writings), it is plain that the idea of 
an offering, whereby the wrath of God. was 
turned away, lies at the foundation of all that 
Paul teaches concerning the reconciliation of God 
to men. Comp. 1 Cor. v. 7; Eph. v. 2 ete., with 
Rom. v. 9; 1 Thess. i.°10 and Eph. ii. 8. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. It is a wonderful expedient of holy love 
that a sinless being should be given up to endure 
the fate of sinners, and so should bring about a 
Divine righteousness, a perfect Divine title to 
life for all sinners in fellowship with Him. Sin 
involves a desire to be as God in the way of self- 
exaltation, and it is a complete denial of God's 
prerogatives. It necessarily provokes a reaction 
of these prerogatives. This reaction is the 
Divine ὀργή, which disowns the right which man 
in the image of God originally possessed to have 
fellowship in the Divine life, and gives him over 
to death. But as this reacting power is nothing 
but God’s eternal unchangeable love, which seeks 
to communicate itself to men, and knows how to 
bring all that opposes it into subserviency to its 
purposes, a restoration has been secured in which 
it will find complete satisfaction. Into that very 
world in which this Divine reaction against sin 
was displayed One has been introduced, to 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 






















(sins) were completely foreign. In the bodily 
and mental sufferings which His holy love to God 
and men led Him to endure while He was in that 
state, He appeared to be just the reverse of what 
He really was. He appeared to be sin, and 
thus the reaction against sinners was in fact 
abolished. God Himself thus brought it to an 
end by means of that Son who is essentially one — 
with Himself. In accordance with His righteous — 
will, that Son denied Himself, completely entered 
our sinful humanity affected as it was by that re- _ 
action, and as the Son of man, as another Adam 
suffered death for the benefit of all our race. ἡ 
This abolished the influence which denied the — 
title of all men to life, or rather restored it to 
them altogether. Now every one who enters 
into fellowship with that Sinless One, who has 
thus been made sin, (7. 6. whoever believes in 
Him) becomes possessed of this Divine title. 
When we are in Christ, 7. 6., in fellowship with 
this Sinless One whom God has made sin for this 
very purpose, we affirm or justify that reaction 
which fell upon Him who deserved it not, that it 
might not fall upon us who deserved it (γνόντας 
duaptiav). We justify God in His opposition to 
us, condemn ourselves, confess our absolute un- 
worthiness and Christ’s perfect worthiness; and 
we present for acceptance before God nothing in 
ourselyes but only what thereis in Christ. Such 
is the work of holy love by whose efficacy our 
restoration has become possible. 

2. It is therefore in the work of expiation which 
God’s holy love has devised and accomplished, 
that we must find the basis of the work of recon- 
ciliation. This reconciliation is simply a restora- 
tion of the friendship which once existed between 
God and our race (the world) perverted from 
Him by sin and lying under His wrath. Itis a 
work which must be ascribed entirely to God. 
He it was who reconciled the world unto himself, 
and two things may be especially remarked in 
what He is doing for its accomplishment: 1. He 
imputes not to men their sins, He blots out the 
record of themin His book; 2. He has committed 
to the hearts and lips of those who are called to 
the ministry, the word of reconciliation (comp. 
Col. ii. 18 f.; Eph. ii. 17; Rom. x. 14f.). These 
messengers in God’s name, with great earnestness 
make known the Gospel to men, that they may 
procure for Christ the best reward for all His 
suffering, as they urgently press those for whom 
He died to accept the reconciliation He has pro- 
vided, to be reconciled to that God who has be- 
stowed such great things (ver. 21), and with fall 
confidence in Him to renounce every thing in- 
consistent with His will. 

3. The proper fruit of all this must be a com- 
plete change and renewal. The love of Christ 
giving Himself up to atone for sin, swallows up 
the individual life of all in His own death for 
them. The selfishness which made its own gra-— 
tification the only end and centre of all its efforts, 
is exchanged for a life devoted to Christ. In 
the eyes of His followers Christ will be sur 
rounded with a glorious radiance. Every un. 
worthy thought of Him will be renounced, H) 
will be glorified by the Divine Spirit in ou® 
hearts, and He will be acknowledged to be ex- 
ceeding great, their all in all. Another result 
of Hisinf ence will be that each of these followers 


whose nature all ungodly thoughts and ee i 





CHAP. V. 11-21. 


103 





will regard his brethren and his fellowmen, | 


whoever they may be, in an entirely new light, 
not according to their natural and external re- 
lations, but according to what they are or should 
be in Christ, 7. 6. what they are in consequence 
of His redeeming work and the fellowship of His 
general mercy. Their hearts will be thus greatly 
expanded and strengthened in love, selfish pas- 
sions will be restrained and overcome by the 
love of Christ and a burning zeal, for the cause 
of God (which will probably seem like insanity 
to those who know not the love of Christ), or, if 
the salvation of souls demand it, a wise modera- 
tion and a prudent circumspection will be mani- 
fested in all their conduct. 

4. Auacustine:—‘‘ Behold our Mediator! Not 
God without humanity, nor man without divi- 
nity; but intermediate between mere Deity and 
mere humanity, he is a human divinity, and a 
divine humanity” (ver. 19). 

[5. The whole scheme of salvation is the off- 
spring of Divine love. No one should imagine 
the absurdity that God has changed and become 
any more merciful and loving in Himself since 
Christ has interposed for our salvation than He 
was before. That scheme and Christ’s work 
only removed obstructions to the manifestation 
of a love which was forever the same. By what 
Christ does for man and in man, He makes it 
consistent for God to pardon and have fellowship 
with men. And onthe ground of such a mani- 
festation of love, we have a right, and we who 
have heard of it are bound to call on every hu- 
man being, in every possible condition, to be re- 
conciled to God. To all who reject this scheme 
of mercy it is right to proclaim the terrors of the 
Lord still, for there remaineth no other sacrifice 
and no power in the universe to save a man who 
neglects so great a salvation. Comp. Barnes 
Observy. on the whole chapter]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


SrarKke:—Ver. 11. (On Luther’s translation: 
schén fahren). Christ ought to be preached in a 
way which is attractive and appropriate to the 
nature of the Gospel, but so that men may be truly 
converted. Happy is it for that preacher who in 
all his duties and aims is so manifest to God that 
he can humbly and truly enjoy a good conscience. 
A faithful pastor will so walk that the consciences 
of all who hear him will be deeply impressed with 
a conviction of his ability, his fidelity, and his 
uprightness.—Ver. 12. If a faithful minister is 
bound to convince his hearers of his uprightness, 
they are equally bound to defend him against 
every attempt to destroy his reputation (chap. 
xii. 11).—Ver 18. Hepincer:—When a man is 
grieved by the severity of his minister, he should 
remember that it was done on God’s behalf, and 
if God was pleased, why should he find fault and 
be angry? Jer. vi. 27. Of all persons in the 
world the minister of Christ should see that he 
is both loving and severe in due moderation 
(2 Tim. ii. 24 f.).—Ver. 14. In His incarnation 
and in all He did and suffered, our Lord acted as 
ν Mediator for the whole human race. In God’s 
-ight we are all dead and risen with Him. It is 
ἂν glorious mark of a true servant of God when 
the love of Christ is the moving principle of all 





his duties and his zeal. Such a one cannot but 
be truly simple and sincere (chap. ii. 17). The 
hireling, on the other hand, who loves only him- 
self and the world, will be silent when he ought 
to speak and speak when he ought to be silent. 
—Ver. 15. If sanctification is taken away from 
redemption, grace is turned into licentiousness; 
but if redemption is taken away from sanctifica- 
tion, Christianity becomes difficult, yea, imprac- 
ticable. By a believing application to ourselves 
of redemption by Christ, we are delivered from 
the guilt and punishment, but by sanctification, 
its fruit, we are delivered from the dominion of 
sin. Justification and sanctification are always 
to be united. The purer and the richer the ap- 
propriation of mercy the easier and more perfect 
the performance of duties. When faith receives 
the mercy, it sets the heart to work by love. 
Thus the whole of Christianity consists in faith 
receiving and love giving. Whoever receives 
much has much to give. To receive much and 
give nothing proves that you do not properly re- 
ceive, and to give without receiving proves that 
you do not properly give. You receive not, and 
you give not, from God.—Ver. 16. Hepincer:— 
Christians should esteem one another in propor- 
tion as they discover upon each other the tokens 
of the Spirit’s presence and of a new creation. 
All else is of no importance (Matth. xii. 46 f.).—- 
HEDINGER :—Let it be your first object to kno,. 
whether a man is in and through Christ a new 
creature. That, and that alone, is what God 
looks at.—Ver. 17. Everything depends upon the 
new man in Christ, upon regeneration and an 
active faith (Gal. v. 6). We may apply to the 
kingdom of grace what our Lord says of the king- 
dom of glory (Rey. xxi. 5). Hrpinger:—How 
often we hear of old usages! In Christ every- 
thing is new and is renewed day by day. What 
is old in opposition to the Scriptures, old withs 
out growth is good for nothing. HrpingeR:— 
Golden truth! God is reconciled, peace pro- 
claimed, Christ a sinner for us, and we righteous 
and holy in Him. The curse, sin and death, 
what harm can they do to one who is in Christ 
(Eph. ii.5 f.; Rom. viii.1)? The principal point 
for those who give instruction under the New 
Testament is, in what way reconciliation with 
God takes place, and how each of us can have 
part init? But he who is himself unreconciled 
to God, and especially with his neighbor, dis- 
penses to others what he rejects for himself.— 
Ver. 19. Hepincer:—There are two kinds of 
non-imputation: 1, When God lays upon His Son 
the sins of the world (Isa. lxiii. 5 f.), that all men 
may be freed from the necessity of satisfying 
God’s Law, either by perfect obedience or by 
punishment. This is the general grace which is 
prepared for all, but is not actually imparted 
to all. But when faith appropriates our Lord’s 
merits, there immediately follows another and 
truer kind of non-imputation; 2, When the sin- 
ner is justified, 7.¢., is absolved from all guilt 
and becomes a partaker in all Christ’s benefits, 
yea, in Christ Himself and everything that be- 
longs to Christ.—Ver. 20. Spener:—lIf one had 
committed an offence against a great sovereign, 
and had foefeited his life, it would be looked upon 
as a great matter if that sovereign condescended 
to give him mercy when he humbled himself to 


104 





ask for it. But what would be said if that sove- 
reign should send messengers and entreat him to 
be reconciled? And yet God has done this, and 
shown a love beyond all comprehension. Always 
present God’s word in such simplicity and purity 
that all shall see and feel that it is God who 
teaches, exhorts and comforts through thee. 
When listening to God’s ministering servant re- 
member that it is God’s voice you hear, and that 
it is with God you have to do.—Ver. 21. Spe- 
NeER:—As God made Christ to be sin, who had 
no sin in Himself, and hence divine justice saw 
none of his own righteousness, but only imputed 
sin in Him, so God makes us who are in Christ 
to be righteousness, and henceforth He beholds 
no more the sins which are in us and have been 
forgiven, but only righteousness. We thus be- 
come righteousness; not in appearance or in 
imagination merely,*but in deed and in truth. 
Oh, the depth of God’s wisdom and love! 
BerLens Bisie, Ver. 11:--The fear of the 
Lord makes us anxious to possess those powers 
of persuasion which are so needful among men. 
Fear and love thus act together.—Ver. 13. Not 
unfrequently what seems extravagant, and be- 
yond all bounds of discretion, may be really 
right, and spring from the exceeding greatness 
of one’s love to God. A discreet gentleness is 
a truly divine gift, for which we have much rea- 
son to pray.—Ver. 14. The love of Christ is a 
cordial affection which Christ has toward the 
new born soul, and which the soul has for Christ. 
The one highly esteems, properly recognizes, 
embraces and longs for; the other is willing to 
do any thing to please the beloved one; avoids 
everything which is likely to grieve, injure or 
displease him; adapts himself honestly to his 
wishes; endeavore to unite with him more and 
more, and has a complete fellowship with him in 
all things. It makes each Christian careful and 
quick to understand the will of his beloved Lord, 
and to know what will be agreeable or disagree- 
able to Christ, what will be injurious or benefi- 
cial to Christ’s kingdom, and what will be dis- 
graceful or honorable to Christ’s cause. It 
makes him compliant and submissive to his 
Lord’s will; it frees him from the necessity of 
pleasing the world, and takes away all fear when 
he is called to testify against prevailing corrup- 
tion. Ministers especially should allow nothing 
but this love to control them in their preaching 
and in theirlives. The surest sign that we have 
it is, when it urges us to a loving obedience, to 
fidelity, truth and uprightness, to love our neigh- 
bor and even our enemies, to be merciful and 
forbearing toward those who are in trouble, to 
help those who are oppressed, and to give coun- 
sel and assistance to al! who stand in need. 
Those who hunger for Christ’s love, have already 
begun to love Him, and the more this desire is 
awakened, the more will their love inerease, un- 
til it will become strong enough to overcome all 
earthly love. And yet this love is of a delicate 
nature and habit, for it can easily be injured and 
lost. (Rey. ii. 4). The enemy can never bear to 
have a soul know, and hear, and speak only of 
the love of Christ. Even well-meaning persons 
often think that such a one does too much. 
(Martha, Mary). The whole of Christianity 
springs from the death and life of Christ as our 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 











Saviour and our Head. The ministry of the 
Gospel is therefore a’ministry of death and life. 
—Ver 15. Itis by a profound consideration of 
the death and resurrection of Christ that we are 
brought most effectually to deny ourselves, and 
to renounce what we before loved. The love 
which led Jesus to suffer and die for us will 
so affect our hearts, and His resurrection will 
awaken in us a love so peculiar, that we shall 
live for Him, depend upon Him, eat and drink 
for Him, sleep and awake for Him, walk in and 
with Him, and find every thing sanctified and 
sweetened by His love. What a wild fancy to 
think of having part in Christ and in His glory 
while we continue in sin! Accursed delusion, to 
make the infinitely Holy One a minister of sin! 
To live wholly for ourselves is to live far from 
God and in corruption. It is nothing but hell 
and death for a man to consult only his own in- 
terest, to think of, to love and to have others 
love no one but himself, and to make a god of 
himself. Christ’s death should draw us off from 
all such wretched idolatry as this. Self-denial 
takes from us nothing, but it restores us much 
which we had lost.—Ver. 16. They who die with 
Christ for all, can never more know or depend 
upon man according to the flesh. (Deut. xxxiii. 
9). They love even their own children only in 
and for God. The more we are devoted to God, 
the more acceptable and the nearer we are to 
Him. Childhood must give way to youth and 
manhood. We must not always remain satisfied 
with Christ’s humanity, but venture to be fami- 
liar with His Divinity. For the very idea of the 
sons of God implies that those who have been 
alienated from God are reunited with Him in 
spiritual friendship—Ver. 17. The new creation 
is the life of Jesus in us, it is being horn of God, 
it is a holy life. Init the old must completely 
pass away; and henceforth we must never creep 
back, but be ever pressing forward. We live 
among shadows no longer, but with Christ Him- 
self. (Col. ii. 17).—Ver. 18. God’s eternal love 
has given us all things and has found means of 
restoring peace and friendship between us and 
Him by Jesus Christ (1 Jno. ii. 2 f.) whom He 
has therefore exalted above all things. (Heb. i. 
3).—Ver. 19. God has committed all things to 
Christ; it is with Him, therefore, that we have 
to do, and to Him we must apply. The world 
had to be reconciled to God, for His wrath was 
upon it. He was not, indeed, our enemy, for 
then He would have sent His wrath upon us; 
but He loved us even when we were His ene- 
mies. Had he not extended mercy to us we 
should never have turned to Him. The whole 
world has now a right to mercy. Christ has ac- 
quired for all men a non-imputation of those sins 
which they had committed in the days of their 
ignorance; for He has taken them upon Himself 
and offered a sacrifice for them, so that God can 
now be gracious and extend mercy to sinners. 
He has thus become a Christ for us. The Hol 

Spirit may now lay hold upon those sins whic 

reign in our hearts, expose them, and make 
them so painful and grievous to us, that we shall 
be willing to renounce them. They are eradi- 
cated from our souls, and we are freed from 
their power. Not imputing our trespasses unto 
us will not therefore make us feel secure in sin, 


δὴ 


a 


= i. —-—_-: —_— °°” 
ῃ 
7 


ἃ v the prejudices of our own hearts. 


CHAP. V. 11-21. 


105 


un 'σστπο;τ τον -Ἔ--ππρπΠΠ Ἐ»ΡΓΓ  -τ,ἘὈ)ἷὈἰι-- Ἐἀἀΐςπονον««. ἝὍἝττ ΓΤ 6 


but drive us in our extremity to exclaim, Whoisa 
God like unto Thee, etc. (Mic. vii. 18)? The work 
of preaching the Gospel is the most exalted of all 
employments, and yet never exalts the preacher. 


As he must always be entreating and enduring | 


the wrath of his fellowmen, and as he is perpe- 
tually dealing with the miserable, he must surely 
find enough to smother a spirit of pride. 
creative word by which all things came into 
being, is the same word which reconciles and 
reunites the creature with the Creator, and 
which so sanctifies and justifies all who receive 
it, that they become meet for the inheritance of 
the saints in light.—Ver. 20. God’s reconcilia- 
tion reaches not only to the world in general, 
but to each one of our race in particular. Jesus 
Christ offers each man abundant means of ac- 
quiring an interest in His blood. Those who 
are sent to us with the Gospel, entreat us to al- 
low the work of salvation in our hearts, to put 
ourselves in the way of reconciliation, and to ac- 
cept of its conditions, in order that our disor- 
dered minds may have fellowship with God — 
Ver. 21. When the great truth that a sinner may 
be looked upon in Christ as righteous, has once 
become established in the heart, every other es- 
sential truth of the Gospel must follow. Christ 
Himself enters the heart, and the sinner becomes 
righteous even as He is righteous. (1 Jno. iii. 7). 

Rreger:—Ver. 11. Whoever lives habitually in 
the light of that day (ver. 10), will do those 
things from the fear of God which will gain the 
confidence of his fellow-men. He feels constantly 
open to an inspection far more perfect than that 
which he looks for from men.—Ver. 12. Many 
can so manage matters in the sight of men as to 
gain esteem for their doctrines and lives for a 


_ season; but not only does God know their hearts, 


but occasionally even a human eye penetrates 
this outward form, and discovers that such are 
not what they seem.—Ver. 13. When we find 
those who are condemned for doing too much, 
and acting in an extravagant, unreasonable and 
irregular manner, if it is honestly done for God 
and His truth, we should bear with them, wait 
for more light, and rather leave the tares to 
grow than to root up the surrounding wheat. 
Let us only be careful that our forbearance 
springs from a good conscience, and not from 
that. lukewarm spirit which our Lord has _pro- 
nounced so loathsome.—Ver. 14. Love to Christ 
should have reference to two very different as- 
pects of His character. On the one hand we find 
that His zeal for His Father’s house made Him 
break through established usages, and expose 
Himself to the deadly malice of His enemies; 


᾿ and on the other He yielded much that He might 


spare the plants which His Father had planted. 
Christ bore us all upon His heart when He suf- 
fered unto death, and if we would share in His 
passion, we must not find our pleasure in our- 
selves and in external advantages, but strive to 
exhibit the proper fruit of His life and death by 
dying ourselves to sin and living unto righteous- 
ness.—Ver. 16f. Such a knowledge of Christ, 
when it has power in the heart, will never more 
allow us to judge of things according to the out- 
ward appearance, the opinions of the multitude 
A thorough 
«ia of Christ dying and rising again for 


[ 


TAN 


The | 











us, will destroy confidence in every thing else, 
and make us glory only in His cross (we shall 
especially put no reliance upon our own personal 
intercourse with Jesus, efc.).— Ver. 18. The doc- 
trine of Christ dying and rising again, one for 
all, is doubtless far above human reason; and 
yet we soon learn from experience that it per- 
fectly tallies with all that God’s law and grace 
utters in our consciences. The great work of 
reconciliation commenced in the bosom of God,. 
when he pitied us in our apostasy, our enmity,, 
and our utter inability to return to Him. And. 
yet the actual work of reconciliation had to be 
accomplished by Jesus Christ, whose obedience, 
and sufferings, and death glorified God’s righte-- 
ousness, and implanted a permanent hatred to: 
sin in our hearts, without which we could never’ 
come to God. And yet with all this provisiom. 
for our reconciliation on God’s part, much would 
have been wanting if there had been provided no 
means of actually implanting faith in our hearts; 
the work of love was, therefore, not complete: 
until the ministry of reconciliation had been ap- 
pointed and sent forth to proclaim what had 
been done, and to beseech men to be reconciled 
to God.—Ver. 19f. God has Himself provided 
the Lamb on which He has laid the iniquities of 
us all, and has determined that the Son whom 
He has sent to effect reconciliation must suffer 
for us; but He has promised and fulfilled the 
promise, that that Son should appear before God 
in the Holiest of all with an offering which is. 
sufficient for the sins of the whole world, and 
should send forth messengers to preach forgive- 
ness in His name to all who penitently believe on 
Him. Whoever now bears the burden of sin and 
is lost, it must be because he will not believe, but 
despises the offered reconciliation. This word 
of reconciliation is the very kernel and substance 
of God’s testimony in the Scriptures, and if we 
desire to promote His designs of mercy to men, 
we must seek to bring men to Him through faith. 
in this word.—Ver. 21. By the utter rending of 
the flesh of Christ, the innocent and spotless. 
Lamb, the sin which has penetrated every part 
of our nature has been so condemned, that His 
righteousness may be imputed to us. He has 
become sin by the imputation of our sins, and 
by the imputation of His righteousness to us we 
have become the righteousness of God; and we 
now have a legal and unquestionable right to an 
access to God in His kingdom, and an heirship 
to all things like that which the Son of God 
Himself possesses. Hallelujah! 

BenceL:—Ver. 14. What an admirable uni-- 
versality! ministers constrain, hearers are con- 
strained, and both because Christ died for 
them! 

Hevsyer:—Ve_r. 11. The Christian not only 
loves but fears the Lord; and this fear is by no. 
means a feeble power in his heart. Our conduct 
is known to man, our hearts to God. No one 
can have infallible knowledge of another’s heart; 
and yet we may see enough of a Christian bro- 
ther to give him our unreserved confidence.— 
Ver. 12. A minister’s reputation should be pre- 
cious to his people, for it belongs to them; and 
they should be supplied with such materials as 
are necessary to maintainit.—Ver. 13. A fervent 
Christian’s zeal is sure to seem hke extrava 


106 


gance and enthusiasm in the eyes of the indolent 
and lukewarm.—Ver. 15. The ultimate object 
of the atoning death of Jesus was a holy 
Church, thoroughly consecrated to His service. 
A real Christian therefore longs, and his con- 
stant prayer is, to be freed from self-will—Ver. 
16. Our relationship to Jesus is far higher 
than that of family or of country (Matth. xii. 
48 f.).—Ver. 17. Christ has founded a new 
world in every respect; the world itself is to 
have a new form, and society new principles; 
and as to an individual man,when the spirit of 
Christ takes possession of his heart, he must be- 
come a new creature, his mind and heart must 
be completely changed, and all his springs of ac- 
tion must be renewed (a good text for a new year: 
Have we actually lived to see a new year) ?— 
Ver. 18. God is the original author of salvation, 
and the whole scheme was formed by Him, but 
Christ executed it. In Him God came down to 
man. Only by His incarnation could our free- 
dom from sin become possible. The greater 
then the guilt of those who neglect so great a 
salvation! The ministerial office, through which 
the mediatorial work of Christ is itself mediated 
to man, must continually hold up the offer of re- 
conciliation through Christ alone. This must be 
the salt of every sermon.—Ver. 19. It is by 
Christ’s entrance into our humanity, His suffer- 
ings for sin and His fulfilment of all righteous- 
ness, that man can be absolved fram condemna- 
tion and worthy of the Divine favor. God was not 
before our enemy, for He is nothing but Love; 
but only through Christ is it possible for Him to 
exercise complacency as well as benevolence to- 
ward man. Only in consequence of His blood 
can our sins be forgiven and we be redeemed from 
wrath (Matth. xx. 28; xxvi. 26; Jno. i. 29; 1 
Jno. i. 1, 9: οὐγυ ὃν 1. Thess. ἃ, 10).—Ver. 20. 
Christ cannot in person come to each individual 
of our race; and hence he sends his messengers 
into all the world, to every creature. Their ex- 
hortations are, in fact, God’s; for as He speaks 
in God’s name, so must they. And yet the spirit 
in which they speak is not that of command but 
of entreaty. Their words are words of pleading 
love: ‘* Be ye reconciled to God; accept the re- 
‘conciliation He offers you in Christ; put confi- 
dence in God, that He loves you, and that He 
‘ean and will forgive you.” Whoever thinks of 
preaching the Gospel, must present Christ as an 
atoning Saviour, and must himself know what it 
‘is to be reconciled to God. If you would be the 
trumpets of grace, yield yourselves entirely up to 
grace. If we would honor Christ Himself, we 
must honor this ministry.—Ver. 21. Only He 
‘who was Himself guiltless, and could bear a 
guilt not His own, will be the destroyer of sin. 
W. F. Besser:—Ver. 11. If we have been re- 
‘deemed from the wrath to come, we need not be 
tormented with fears of our future Judge; yet 
we should have a holy reverence for that glori- 
ous Being who will reward every man according 
to his works (1 Pet. i. 17), and we should be 
watchful lest we displease Him by unfaithful- 
ness to our vows and an unholy life.—Ver. 14. 
One for all. Here we have the sweetest kernel 
and best sample of Christ’s love. Faith in one 
who died for me and in whom I died, can only 
«come by hearing of this wonderful exhibition of 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. } 
oe 


His love. My faith creates no Saviour for me; 
it is only the act by which I receive a Saviour 
offering Himself to me.—Ver. 17. Although those 
who know Christ by faith may endure many con- 
flicts with the flesh, they are really new crea- 
tures, for the Holy Spirit will keep alive the 
spark of faith, even in the hearts of weak be- 
lievers. The Apostle’s ‘Behold,’ refers to 
every Christian, though he may be never so im- 
perfect. For though our fleshly nature may re- 
tain much which is old, it is only what is dead 
and dying by a daily repentance; but the old 
guilt and the old dominion of sin is gone (Rom. 
viii. 1, 12).—Ver. 18. Everything in our salva- 
tion begins with God and nothing with us. It is 
of God, that he can now receive and love us (Tit. 
iii. 5; 1 Jno. iv. 10).—Ver. 19. Christ’s death was 
an act of reconciliation, for it was in fact His 
own act.—Ver. 20. As the king’s own majesty is 
supposed to accompany the ambassador by whom 
he is represented, so those who preach the Gos- 
pel have something of the dignity of Him who 
sends them.—God beseeches us! Such entreaties 
have power, because God lays aside all His wrath 
and cordially offers us all His treasures with a 
fatherly admonition, that we despise them not 
but truly accept of them, and turn to Him with 
a childlike spirit (Heb. xii. 25). He who prayed 
for us in the days of His flesh with many tears, 
since His ascension, as our merciful High Priest, 
to the right hand of God, directs His most affect- 
ing prayers now to us, as the voice of His blood 
comes through His messengers, crying: Be ye 
reconciled to God.—Ver 21. Nay, He says not: 
“Come and make reconciliation for yourselves! 
Bring something of your own!” Nothing of this. 
He demands nothing fromus. Atonement, grace, 
and eternal life, are all prepared through the 
blood of the Lamb! Repentance, faith, life and 
all needed strength are given and effectually 
wrought within us by the quickening energy of 
that blood. 

Grrock:—Ver. 20. Think how needful it is to 
seek, how easy it is to find, and how blessed it 
will be to have, this reconciliation. 

[We have in this passage: I. Man’s original 
condition. 1. He was sin (ver. 21), and lived af- 
ter the flesh (ver. 16); 2. Was alienated from 
God, and an enemy of God (needing reconcilia- 
tion); 8. Was under Divine wrath, although still 
loved and not abandoned by God (ver. 11). IL. 
Man’s redemption by Christ. 1. This originated 
wholly in God’s love (ver. 18); 2. Christ was 
made sin for us (ver. 21); 8. Man’s trespasses 
were not imputed to him (ver. 19); 4. He can be 
made the righteousness of God through Christ 
(ver. 21). III. Application of this redemption 
to man, 1. It must be made known to men 
through the ministry of Christ and His people 
(vers. 18, 19); 2. Men must be persuaded (ver. 
11), and be reconciled to God (ver. 20); 8. They 
must die in Christ, and live as new creatures 
unto Him who died for them (vers. 15-17). 

F. C. Rosertson :—Vers. 18-21 (Abridged): 
I, The reconciliation of God to man. God needed 
a reconciliation, for there was wrath in Him to- 
wards sinners. This was shown in the punish- 
ment of sin, in the convictions of our own con- 


sciences, and in the anger which Christ showed — 


toward sinners. God is indeed immutable, but, 





a « ὦ. 


CHAP. VI. 1-10. 107 





nothing; and secondly, the work of the ministry, 
which consists in declaring God’s reconciliation 
to man, and in beseeching men by every variety 
of illustration and every degree of earnestness to 
be reconciled to God]. 


when man changes, God’s relation to him changes. 
Love to’good is hatred to evil. Distinguish the 
true from the false notion of the Atonement. II. 
The reconciliation of man to God. Here is first 
Christ’s priestly work, to which man can add 


XI.—_THE APOSTLE’S APPEAL IN AN ETHICAL POINT OF VIEW. HIS CONDUCT IN 
RELATION TO IT. 


Cuapter VI. 1-10. 


We then, [om We then] as workers together with him, [then, we also] beseech you 

2 also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. (For he saith, I have heard thee in a 

time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the 

accepted [well accepted, εὐπρόσδεχτος] time; behold, now 7s the day of salvation). 

3 Giving no offence [occasion for stumbling, προσχοπή] in any thing, that the ministry 

4 be not blamed: But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, [as the 

ministers of God, commending ourselves] in much patience, in afflictions, in necessi- 

5 ties, in distresses [in straits, stevoywptats], in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults 

6 [tossings to and fro, dxatactactatc],in labours, in watchings, in fastings ; by [in] pure- 

ness, by [in] knowledge, by [in] long suffering, by [in] kindness, by [in] the Holy 

7 Ghost, by [in] love unfeigned, by [in] the word of truth, by [in] the power of God, 

8 by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by honour [glory, 

δόξης] and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet [om. yet] 

9 true; as unknown, and yet [om. yet] well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as 

0 chastened, and not killed ; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many 
rich; as having nothing, and yet [om. yet] possessing all things. 


Π Ver. 1.—D. (1st cor.) omits ὑμᾶς, and C. and Sinait. (1st cor.) substitute for it ἡμᾶς. 

2 Ver. 2—F. and G. have δεκτός instead of εὐπρόσδεκτος. Their authority, however, is not great. 

3 Ver. 3.—After ἡ διακονία. D. E. F. G. and two other MSS., the Ital., some copies of the Vulgate, the Gothic and Syriac 
versions, many Greek and the Latin Fathers insert ἡμῶν. 

4 Ver. 4.—Rec. has συνιστῶντες on the authority of D. (8d cor.). E. K. L. Sin. (3d cor.), with Chrys. Theodt. Damasc. 
and others, Lachm. Tisch. and Alford (with C. Ὁ. (Ist Cor.) F. G. and Sin.), have συνιστάντες. B. with two cursives and 
one ΜΒ, of Damase. have συνιστανόντες. This text is in nearly the same state as chap. iii. 1, which see.] 


which all things had been traced to the hand or 
God, and especially the phrase, as though God 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 1, 2.—Wee then, as workers to- 
gether with Him, also exhort you that ye 
receive not the grace of God in vain.— 
Connected with the exhortation and entreaty 
(chap. v. 29) in which he had spoken of an inte- 
rest in God’s work of reconciliation by Christ, 
was another consideration with respect to their 
continuance in the grace thus attained. There 
is no indication that σύν in συτεργοῦντες has re- 
ference to the church of Corinth (comp. i. 24) ; 
for had such been the Apostle’s idea, ὑμῖν would 
have been inserted; ‘still less can it be referred 
to the Apostle’s associates in the ministry; and 
least of all can the whole word be made equiva- 
lent to ἔργῳ συμπράττοντες with reference to ver. 
3ff. in contrast with the λόγος in chap. v. 20. 
The only doubt. is whether it implies a codpera- 
tion with God or with Christ. If ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ in 
ver. 20 signifies in behalf of Christ, and not in 
the place of Christ; then the preceding passage in 


TaN 





were beseeching by us (chap. v. 20), would be in 
favor of referring it to God, comp. also 1 Cor. 
iii. 9. In the admonition itself, the whole stress 
must be laid upon the words, not in vain, inas- 
much as these stand at the commencement of the 
sentence. They here signify to be without fruits, 
as in Gal. ii. 2; Phil. ii. 16; 1 Thess. iii. 5. The 
word receive (δέξασθαι) is to be taken not in a 
preterite (as if it meant that ye will not have re- 
ceived), but in a present signification, in accord- 
ance with the uniform usage. We have here the 
moral side of the exhortation, which he had said 
(chap. v. 20) the ministry were urging, viz., Be 
reconciled to God. God’s work of reconciliation 
would be in vain to them, if in receiving it thcy 
did not become new men. The grace of God is 
the grace which had been shown in the work of 
reconciliation, for God had exhibited in that 
work special love to sinners. He gives a reason 
also for his admonition in a parenthetical form. 
in ver. 2 (for ver. 3 is grammatically connected 


108 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





with παρακαλοῦμεν), by introducing a prophetical 
expression (Isa. xlix. 8, in the words of the 
LXX.), which he implies had a fulfilment while 
he was writing—for he says: In an accepted 
time I heard thee, and in a day of salva- 
tion I succored thee: behold, now is the 
well accepted time; behold, now is the 
day of salvation.—God must be regarded as 
the speaker in this quotation. In the origina! 
passage God was addressing the servant of the 
Lord, and through him as their head the whole 
people of God. Brncent: The Father speaks to 
the Messiah, in whom are included all believers. 
The hearing which was indicated by the succor, 
the prophet implies was to be shown in the deli- 
verance of the people from the calamities into 
which they had fallen (Isa. xlix. 7); but it is 
here made to refer to the salvation which God 
gives by Christ, and which the Apostle exhorts 
the Corinthians not to receive in vain. The ac- 
cepted time (καιρὸς δεκτός, Heb. ps ny) is 
T 


a time of favor, (the grace); the same as the 
‘day of salvation” (the time for the communica- 
tion of salvation to Israel (Mark i. 15; Gal. iv. 
4). It becomes accepted, in consideration of the 
impression it made upon the people. The same 
idea is intended, only more forcibly expressed, in 
the words, well accepted (εὐπρόσδεκτος, used in 
chap. viii. 12; Rom. xv. 16, 31). The phrases, 
I heard thee and I succored thee, imply that when 
God was making this promise, He looked upon 
the future as already past. In Paul’s applica- 
tion of the passage, the words, Behold, now, 
(ἰδοὺ viv), present the reason for the admonition 
in ver. 1, g. d.: let not the opportunity pass un- 
improved; for if ye allow the grace now given 
you to be in vain, there are no other means of 
salvation for you (comp Heb. iii. 13 ff.; Luke 
xix. 42). The word, now, embraced the brief 
period until the second coming of Christ (Meyer). 
A pazvonomasia is perceptible in the use of 
δέξασϑαι and δεκτός. [Hopau: ‘The Scriptures 
contain abundant evidence that inspiration did 
not interfere with the natural play of the powers 
of the sacred writers. Although they spoke as 
they were moved by the Holy Ghost, yet they 
were probably in most cases unconscious of His 
influence, and acted as spontaneously as the be- 
liever does under the power of the Spirit in all 
His holy exercises. Hence we find that the sa- 
cred writings are constructed according to the 
ordinary laws of mind, and that the writers pass 
from subject to subject by the usual process of 
suggestion and association. So here the use of 
the word δέξασθαι brought up to the Apostle’s 
mind the word δεκτῷ, as it occurs in the Greek 
version of the beautiful passage in Isa. xlix. 8.” 
Srantey: ‘Let not your receiving of the favor of 
God be in vain; for the language of God in the 
prophet is true: ‘In atime which I receive I heard 
thee.’ This view is confirmed by the stress the 
Apostle lays on the word dexréc, carrying it out 
and amplifying it in his own comment which fol- 
lows: God has so spoken, and look! (ἰδοὺ) the 
present is the time which He so receives. You 
ought to receive Him, for He has received you. 
Εὐπρόσδεκτος is a favorite word of the Apostle; 
and as such, and also as being more emphatic, is 
eubstituted for the less familiar and less expres- 
sive term of the Sept.”]. With reference to 











ἰδοὺ, consult the notes on chap. v.17. [Trench 
remarks (Synn. P. Il. 37) that ““καιρός signifies 
time (χρόνος) bringing forth its several births, tha 
critical epoch-making periods when all that has 
been slowly ripening through long ages is ma- 
ture and comes to the birth in grand decisive 
events, which constitute at once the close of one 
period and the commencement of another. It is 
the nick of time; but whether, as such, to make 
or to mar, effectually to help or to hinder, the 
word by itself does not determine.” According 
to this, the καιρός of which both the prophet and 
the Apostle spoke was an epoch of great import- 
ance in consequence of the great events trans- 
piring, but. rendered favorable and acceptable 
(δεκτός) by the turning of the people to the Lord. 
(See also WessTER’s Synonymns, p. 215)]. 


Ver. 3-10. Giving no occasion for stum- 
bling in any thing, that the ministration 
have nota reproach cast upon it.—Luther 
incorrectly regards this participial sentence as a 
part of the Apostle’s admonition or entreaty to 
the Corinthians; as if he was exhorting them not 
to receive the grace in vain, and to give no οἵ- 
fence lest, ete. But had such been the Apostle’s 
mind he would have written διδόντας instead of 
διδόντες. This word is rather to be connected 
directly with πσρακαλοῦμεν before the parenthe- 
sis, and it shows how the conduct of the admo- 
nishers corresponded with and gave force to tha 
admonition. In this verse he resumes his apo- 
logy for himself. The words ἐν μηδενί (in no- 
thing) are neuter like ἐν παντί in ver. 4. M7 is 
not here in the place of οὐ [for it implies the in- 
tention and desire of the writer]. Comp. 1 Cor. x. 
33. Προσκοπή is used only here in the New Tes- 
tament, but it is equivalent to πρόσκομμα 1 Cor. 
viii. 8. It implies that Paul and his companions 
would do nothing to lead others into error, or to 
impair the proper effect of their work or of their” 
admonition, and so they would give no occasion 
for unbelief and unchristian conduct. (Meyer). 
In saying that the ministration have nota re- 
proach cast upon it, he intended to say that they 
subjected themselves to so much pains, in order 
that their efforts as Apostles to reconcile men to 
God, might be saved from bitter reproaches (for 
μωμηϑῆῇ implies that he had in his mind no com- 
mon or slight reproaches). Probably he had 
reference to those opponents who were inclined 
to make, or perhaps had already indulged in 
such reproaches.—But in all things, as the 
ministers of God, commending ourselves 
in much patience. (ver. 4). In συνιστάντες 
(chap. iii. 1), we have the positive side in con- 
trast with the negative side, which had been 
given in ver. 8, and it is placed before ἑαυτοὺς 
because it contains the emphatic point. (Meyer). 
The idea is not that they were commending 
themselves as ministers [as our English A. V. may 
be understood and is usually punctuated] for 
then the expression would have been ὡς θεοῦ 
διακόνους, but we commend ourselves as the mi- 
nisters of God commend themselves; or, as is 
appropriate for such ministers. [ALrorp: “ When 
these words signify to recommend ourselves in ἃ 
bad sense (chap. iii. 1; v. 12), ἑαυτοὺς precedes 
the verb; but here and in chap. iv. 2, where used 
ina good sense and without any stress on ἑαυτοὺς, 
it follows the verb. This is only one of many 


z 


a 


a 


CHAP. VI. 1-10. 
ἘΠ Το bo aN a aaa o> > De Ὁ 6 ὦ 


continually occurring instances of the importance 
of the collocation of words with regard to the 
emphasis.” ] The points on which they com- 
mended themselves, are introduced by ἐν. They 
are, in the first place, Christian virtues, such as 
patient endurance (ὑπομονῇ, ver. 4)—pureness 
(ἁγνότης xk. τ. 4., ver. 6). In connection with 
patience (perseverance, steadfastness, in contrast 
with despondency and reluctance) he mentions a 
variety of states in which he had exhibited much 
patience, such as in affliction, etc. Augustine 
quotes vy. 4-12, to show that Paul possessed 
those qualities which Cicero makes necessary to 
an orator, viz., magna granditer et ornate loguendi. 
In proof of what he had said he now adduces 
principally the trichotomy contained in vv. 4, 5, 
in which he specifies how he had exhibited pa- 
tience in three triplets of conditions. Bengel 
sys the first triplet of trials, afflictions, necessi- 
ties and distresses (straits) were general; the 
second, stripes, imprisonments, and tumults were 
specific; the third, the labors, watchings, and 
fastings were voluntary. These evils consist of 
oppressive, hampering circumstances in general, 
such as drove him into straits; and they are pro- 
bably mentioned in the order of a climax. 
[Stanley divides the Apostle’s enumeration into 
four clauses, all amplifying ἐν παντι. The first 
is an expansion of ἐν ὑπομ. πολλῇ. The second 
enumerates the virtues which accompanied these 
outward hardships, arranged in two divisions, 
not so much by the meaning as by the form of 
the words, the first consisting of one, the latter 
of two words. In the third the words are held 
together merely by the word διά, and by their 
antithetical form. The fourth expands the words, 
through evil report into a long list of the con- 
trasts between his alleged and his real charac- 
ter, at once showing his difficulties and his tri- 
umphs. The first section gives three triplets of 
evils, each growing out of the last word of the 
other. The first describes his hardships ge- 
nerally. In crushing afflictions (ϑλέψεσιν) in 
pressure of difficulties (ἀνάγκαις), in narrow 
straits (orevoywpiac). The prevailing idea is of 
pressure and confinement: each stage narrower 
than the one before, so that no room is left for 
movement or escape].—In afflictions, in ne- 
cessities, in straits.— Στενοχωρίαι are men- 
tioned also in chap. xii. 10, and are the highest 
degree of GAnperc. Comp. chap. iv. 8. 


also mentioned in chap. xii. 10 and in 1 Cor. vii. 
26. (Some interpret the word as referring to 
want, poverty). [‘‘The three words here used 
are cognate in derivation, ϑλέβω to press, squeeze; 
ἄγχω to press tight; στένος strait, angustus. The 
ϑλίψ. is the tribulation itself of whatever kind 
it may be, avay«. is the result in circumstances, 
and crevoy. (as used by Paul in ver. 12; iv. 8; 
and Rom. ii. 9) the result in feeling or appre- 
hension.”” Wesster and WILKINSoN.—‘“ The idea 
of ‘narrow straits’ suggests the thought of actual 
persecutions, of which he gives the three to which 
he was most frequently exposed.” (STanuey), 
viz.].—in stripes, in imprisonments, in tu- 
mults.—On the word πληγᾶις (stripes) comp. 
chap. xi. 23; Acts xvi. 23 f. ᾿Ακαταστασία ac- 
cording to the prevailing usage in the New Tes- 
tament (chap. xii. 20; 1 Cor. xiv. 82; James iii. 





"AvayKat | 
are necessities, calamities of various kinds, and | 





104 


---.- 





16), has the sense of disorder, or in particular, 
tumults, insurrections. (Luke xxi. 9). With re- 
spect to such things in Paul’s life, comp. Acts 
xili. 50; xiv. 19; xvi. 19 f.; xix. 23 f. Others 
interpret the word of expulsions from society, 
restless wanderings from place to place, comp. 
ἀστατεῖν in 1 Cor. iy. 11.—In labors, in watch. 
ings, in fastings.—The labors here mentioned 
relate, not atleast exclusively, tolabors for his owp 
support (1 Cor. iv. 12), but to the cares and toils of 
his Apostleship, chap. xi. 28, 27; 1 Cor. iii. 8; xv. 
58. In like manner on watchings, comp. chap. 
xi. 27; Acts xx. 31. Others, however, think that 
this word has reference to his sleepless cares and 
anxieties for the churches. More particularly it 
refers to his public teachings, journeyings, medi- 
tations and prayers (the whole frame of his 
mind). Fastings also include not those which 
his circumstances rendered unavoidable (1 Cor. 
iv. 11; Phil. iv. 12), and which he especially 
distinguishes from fastings under the name of 
hunger and thirst in chap. xi. 27, but those fast- 
ings which were voluntarily endured and con- 
nected with prayer. (comp. Acts xiv. 28; xiii. 2 
f.ix. 9). There is no reason, however, to regard 
these as ascetic acts of self-righteousness. In ver, 
6 additional items of moral qualifications for hig 
office are given, viz.—in pureness, in know- 
ledge, in long suffering, in kindness, in 
the Holy Ghost, in love unfeigned, in the 
word of truth, in the power of God.— 
[‘‘There is no reason for exchanging the in, in, 
etc., before each of these expressions for by, by, 
eic., as is done in our English A. V., inasmuch as 
the same preposition is used from ἐν trop. to 
ἐν δυνάμει implying not the instrument but the 
sphere or element in which his ministry moved.” 
Fausset. It is rendered by the English word 
im in Wiclif’s, Tyndale’s, Cranmer’s, and the 
Rhemish versions, and in the translation of the 
American Bible Union]. At the head of the se, 
ries in this second section stands ἁγνότης, moral] 
purity (comp. Phil. iv. 8; 1 Tim. v. 22; 1 Jno, 
iii. 3), or chastity in a more special sense. If 
would, however, be too confined a significatioy 
to restrict the word to the sexual passion, and 
above all to the opposite of avarice or a love of 
gain, W.F. Besser says: ‘‘As patience had 
been shown in the nine proofs which had already 
been mentioned, so purity (in heart and inten, 
tion, as a cardinal virtue) runs through the 
eight virtues and gifts which are now to be spas 
cified.” Ψνῶσις is either that practical know. 
ledge which quickly recognizes the Divine will 
z. e., true Christian wisdom (comp. 1 Pet. iii. 7) 
or evangelical knowledge, 7. e., a vivid percep- 
tion of Divine truth. The latter corresponds 
best with the prevailing usage in Paul’s writings. 
Besser: ‘‘ Notintellectual learning is here meant, 
but that sagacity of the heart with respect ἐς 
Divine truth, which enables a minister in al} 
cases to bring out that mind of the Spirit which 
is best suited to the wants of his hearers (Phil. i. 
9); and especially that casuistic wisdom which 
is so indispensable to the cure of souls.” This 
knowledge has also an ethical aspect, and in- 
cludes that faith which surrenders entirely to the 
truth of God. Maxpoduuia and χρηστότης are vir- 
tues which belong to the sphere of love (comp. 1 
Cor. xiii. 4). The former signifies that long en- 


110 THE SECOND EPISTLE 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
— ουυοσξΓο͵ο͵οσοοσοσο ῃ]ῃ]0Φ0ΦΒΟΒΒΒΩΡ ΘῈΣ 





durance or perseverance which is exercised under 
griefs or mortifications; the latter is the same as 
gentleness or kindness in social life and the pas- 
toral work. Trench (Synn. P. Il. 3 3) makes 
μακροϑ, a long holding out of the mind before it 
gives room to action or passion (generally anger) 
against persons (ὑπομόνη, ver. 4, being the same 
self-restraint with respect to things. The Rhe- 
mish renders μακρ. by longanimity, a word which 
even Bp. Taylor’s and Archbishop Whately’s au- 
thority has not been sufficient to naturalize in 
pur language. Χρηστότης is rendered by Wy- 
cliffe, in Gal. v. 22, benignity, and by the Rhemish 
in our passage, ‘“‘sweetness.” Trench, P. Il. 3 
13]. Before the Apostle speaks of the origi- 
nal grace of love itself, he refers to the source 
of all moral excellence, the Holy Ghost, with 
which this fundamental virtue is app~ »priately 
connected as its source. This wv. ὁ » should 
be regarded, not merely as a charism, but as a 
power always dwelling and acting in the Chris- 
tian, and manifesting itself in all his conduct. 
. ᾿Ανυπόκριτη (unfeigned) occurs also in Rom. xii. 
9, as an attribute of love. In ver. 7 he passes 
on to notice his work as a minister, and that 
which commended him to his hearers. As in 
the words, love unfeigned, he probably had some 
reference to his insincere opponents who affected 
the appearance of much love, so in the word of 
truth he had a similar reference to impurity of 
doctrine. (comp. chap. ii. 17; iv. 2). The want 
of the article shows that he must have meant, 
not as in Col. i. 5. and other places, the Gospel 
objectively considered, but subjectively that 
which was spoken or proposed to men, the sub- 
stance of which was truth. The power of God 
in like manner is not to be limited here to the 
working of miracles, but referred to the Divine 
power which was seen in all his discourses, and 
proved that God was with him. (comp. iv. 7; 1 
Cor. ii. 4f.; i. 18, 24).—By the armor of 
righteousness on the right hand and on 
the left, by glory and dishonor, by evil 
report and good report —We have here a 
change in the preposition (διὰ) in conformity 
with the ὅπλα with which it is connected. The 
Apostle now takes up the figure of a conflict, and 
hence ὅπλα must mean not any instruments in 
general by which one is aided or protected, but, 
strictly speaking, weapons. Λιὰ τῶν ὅπλων here 
stands independently, like all the other clauses 
introduced by διά, and is not subordinate to ἐν 
duv. ϑεοῦ, as if it implied that the power of God 
was furnishing all these weapons (‘Dei virtute 
nobis arma subministrante.”’ Grortius). The ar- 
mor of righteousness means not merely such 
weapons as are lawful for a righteous man to 
use, or still less, good works (in the Roman Ca- 
tholic sense); but such weapons as are given a 
man by his righteousness. NeANDER: ‘ weapons 
which would be useful to a good man.”’ Among 
these we may understand either moral blame- 
lessness (Billroth), or the righteousness of faith 
which makes a man strong and triumphant 
against all opposition in attack or defence, comp. 
Rom. viii. 81-39 (Meyer); or that righteousness 
of our daily life which proceeds from faith. Its 
weapons are, the spirit of confidence, a joyful 
consciousness that our prayers are heard, the 
strength of a pacified and assured conscience, 


the unanswerable testimony of a holy life, a de 
lightful enjoyment and power in every work, ete. 
(Usiander). Or, as the Apostle had just been 
speaking of the power of God, perhaps he was 
here thinking of God’s righteousness operating 
through him, giving him weapons for every con- 
flict, and directed especially to the establishment 
and development of good: order in the world. 
The object of this Divine power was, on the one 
hand, to preserve in action all that was origi- 
nally beneficial, and on the other to destroy all 
that was injurious; and especially in the depart- 
ment of redemption to preserve and develop ali 
that new life which corresponded to the Divine 
will, and to remove all which was in opposition 
to it. (comp. Beck Chr. Lehrw. pp. 551 ff.). In 
this way probably δικαιοσύνη is used in Rom. vi- 
13, 18 ff. In respect to ὅπλα comp. Eph. vi. 11 
ff.; 1 Thess. vy. 8. The Apostle, however, speaks 
of two kinds of these weapons: those on the 
right hand and those on the left. The former 
were for assault (sword, lance) and the latter 
for defence and protection (shield). [Alford 
thinks this would have required τῶν def. καὶ τῶν 
aptor.: whereas now no article being inserted 
before ἀριστ., it is implied that the panoply (τὰ 
ὅπλα) is on both sides of the person. But even 
without such a specification by the article the 
complete armor for the whole person might yet 
imply that he had the sword and spear (ξίφος καὶ 
δόρυ) in the right, and the shield (ἀσπὶς) on the 
left hand, so that he was called ἀμφιδέξιος. Both 
imposed upon the Apostle as the organ through 
which God’s righteousness acted among men the 
duty of contending against all forms of error 
and immorality which were so injurious to good 
order, and of repelling every kind of assault 
which might be made upon such order and upon 
himself as its representative. (comp. chap. x. 4). 
As he commended himself to men by his use of 
these weapons, and of all the means supplied by 
God’s righteousness for the advancement of God's 
cause in the world, the result was of course that 
he had to pass through glory and dishonor. (ver. 
8, διὰ δόξης καὶ ἀτιμίας, ete.). At this point he 
proceeds to mention the opposite judgments 
which were passed upon his conduct in these 
struggles. Δόξα 15 the glory or honor which was 
awarded him by the friends, and ἀτιμία the dis- 
honor awarded him by the enemies, of God’s 
cause. The latter as well as the former, and 
not merely his conduct under both, were natu- 
rally the means of commending him to those whe 
had spiritual discernment. (comp. Matth. v. 11; 
Luke vi. 22; 1 Pet. iv. 14). Διά stands here in 
a different position from that in which it stood 
before τῶν ὅπλων, and means passing through 
honor and dishonor, ὦ, ¢., in the midst of honor 
and disgrace. (comp. Meyer; the remarks of 
Osiander in opposition to this do not seem ap- 
propriate), The same is true with respect to διὰ 
before dvognuiac καὶ εὐφημίας (through evil report 
and good report). [Azrorp: ‘Once adopted by 
the Apostle the διὰ was kept for the sake of the 
parallelism, though with various shades of mean- 
ing. I would understand it in διὰ do€., e¢e., as in 
διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων (chap. ii. 4) as pointing out 
the medium through which. Thus understood 
these two pairs in ver. 8 will form an easy transi- 
tion from the instrumental, through the medial 


CHAP. VI. 1-10. 


111 





to the passive characteristics which follow.” ]|— 
As deceivers and true, as unknown and 
well known.—These two clauses are connected 
with the two immediately preceding, and not 
with ovriordy. ἑαυτοὺς ὡς ϑεοῦ διάκονοι [. e., the 
author means, it was as deceivers and true, that 
they went through evil report and good report 
(ver. 8), and not that they commended them- 
selves (ver. 4)]. We may notice, however, that 
what is detrimental is mentioned in the first 
part of each couplet, as it had been in some of 
the preceding clauses (δυσφημίας, εὐφημίας). As 
deceivers (ὡς πλάνοι) expresses what was the na- 
ture of the dishonorable reports respecting him, 
the false estimate placed upon him (comp. 
Matth. xxvii. 63; Jno. vii. 12; 1 Tim. iv. 1). 
And true (καὶ ἀληθεῖς), on the other hand, ex- 
presses what was the tenor of the good reports 
respecting him, and at the same time what was 
the actual state of the case. But «ai has not, 
therefore, the meaning of, and yet [as in the Eng- 
lish A. V.], for ὡς qualifies both words in each 
clause, and the two have reference to εὐφημία 
(and d6ga).—In ver. 9 ἀγνοούμενοι has the sense 
of, obscure people, persons whom no one knows 
[BioomrieLp: ‘‘obscure nobodies”], and not 
those who are misunderstood, or for whom 
no one cares. In contrast with it stands 
ἐπιγινωσκόμενοι: those who are well known, 
those who have the good report. It refers, 
therefore, to the knowledge of men, and 
not of God (as in 1 Cor. xiii. 12), to the 
knowledge which true believers had of him 
in opposition to the judgment of opponents 


who undervalued him.—As dying and be-| 


hold we live, as chastened and not 
killed.—In the first members of the several 
antitheses which he is about to enumerate, 
he properly refers still to the evil report 
and dishonor of which he had just spoken; 
and in the second he brings forward the 
actual state of the case, having reference 
to the glory and good report of the ear- 
lier clauses. It is for this reason that he 
indulges in a greater freedom of expression, 
as when he says, and behold, we live. His op- 
ponents had passed a contemptuous judgment 
upon him, and upon the constant danger of 
death in which he was said to stand; they say 
we are dying, and that we are near our last (ὡς 
ἀποϑνήσκοντες, but he describes the case very 
differently when he gives his own view of it, 
chap. iv. 10 f.; 1 Cor. xv. 31}, ‘‘and behold we 
live.” This last is said in a tone of triumph in 
opposition to the depreciation of his opponents. 
Contrary to all their expectations God’s won- 
drously saving power brings us out of our most 
imminent perils, not only uninjured, but with 
ever renewed powers of life (chap. i. 10; iv. 10 
f.). The phrase as chastened (ὡς παιδευόμενοι) 
does not mean that he was actually purified by 
this discipline. On the other hand, as Neander 
says: Paul confesses that he was always needing 
a chastening discipline. The putative meaning 
of ὡς is still to be retained. It was one part of 
the evil report through which the afflicted Apos- 
tle passed, that he was always looked upon as 
one punished or chastened of God (comp. Isa. 
liii. 4). As to the mode in which this was ac- 
complished, we need not imagine that it was by 








a literal scourging. And not killed (ii μὴ ϑανα- 
τούμενοι) Means that he was not so severely chas- 
tened as to be slain.” The discipline was never 
carried to an extreme (comp. Ps. exviii. 18).— 
As sorrowful yet always rejoicing, as 
poor yet making many rich, as having 
nothing, and possessing all things (ver. 
10). In this verse ὡς λυπούμενοι signifies, we are 
looked upon as afilicted and sorrowful, and hence 
as men of a melancholy temperament; but in 
contrast with this distorted judgment, he de- 
clares that they were in reality always rejoicing 
and happy (comp. Phil. iv. 4; Rom. v. ὃ; xii. 
12; 1 Thess, i. 6). The last sentence refers to 
the contrast between their poverty and their 
wealth. In the wealthy city of Corinth, it was 
a very uncommon thing to find a Christian pos- 
sessed of riches (1 Cor. xi. 21). We are com- 
monly ked upon as poor, and yet we make 
many ri , as men who have nothing, and yet 
we have all things. When he says that they 
were rich and had all things, we need not sup- 
pose he had reference to the collections by 
means of which he had at his disposal all the 
wealth of the Christian community, but we must 
understand it of those spiritual blessings to 
which he had already referred when he said that 
they were always rejoicing (comp. chap. viii. 
7,9; 1 Cor. i. 5; Rom. i. 11; xv. 29). Having 
nothing (comp. Matth. viii. 20) indicates a high 
degree of the previously mentioned poverty 
(πτωχοί), and it alludes to the fact that Paul 
was sustained by the labor of his own hands 
[WorpswortTH: “κατὰ in κατέχοντες adds strength 
to the meaning of the latter.” See 1 Cor. vii. 
81. Though we have nothing, we have firm pos- 
session of an eternal inheritance, yea, of ‘all 
things.” STANLEY: “ἔχοντες issimply “having,” 
κατέχοντες is ‘having to the full” |. This having 
all things and being rich must also be understood 
of spiritual possessions, and not of earthly pro- 
perty in addition, nor probably of the everlast- 
ing inheritance (κληρονομία). He speaks in a 
similar, though not in precisely the same, man- 
ner in 1 Cor. iii. 22. NEANDER says: ‘The 
whole world belongs to the Christian, because 
the principle which now governs him is one day 
to control everything on earth. What the Stoics 
once said of their wise men, was never com- 
pletely true except of the Christian; for they 
alone have that true greatness which is founded 
upon humility, and they can never be overcome, 
for they are always in harmony with the will of 
God.” 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The more exalted the benefits of the atone- 
ment, the more important is it that we should not 
receive them merely as something brought to us 
by force to pacify our conscience: but without a 
sincere repentance and a thorough renovation of 
our own hearts. Such a participation in God’s 
greatest gift throws upon us a tremendous re- 
sponsibility ; for if we abuse it we bring upon 
ourselves an irreparable injury, since we not 
merely lose the opportunity of a great salvation, 
but we can hope for no other means of deliver- 
ance. Hence those who commend the atonement 
should earnestly invite those who hear'them, not 


112 THE SECOND EPISTLE 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ee RE οἶσε LAE δοῦν Snes τ πον eA Pee Ee eS ὐξξ εν τθράόο ςὉ 


only to accept of it, but to bring forth all the 
appropriate fruits of such amazing grace. They 
should be exceedingly active in offering God's 
mercy to men, and as fellow-laborers with God, 
earnestly beseech men not to receive the grace of 
God in vain, but diligently to bring forth and 
present to God the fruits of righteousness. 

2, But to this word of exhortation, all that 
we are and do should correspond and give 
power. God’s ministers should not only give no 
such offence, that those who hate their work, 
may take occasion to insult and reproach it; but 
conduct themselves so as to gain the approbation 
of all well disposed persons. They should never 
become weary, hesitating, indolent, or despond- 
ing in their work; but under every discourage- 
ment and opposition, even under personal abuse, 
tumults, and loss of liberty, they should remain 
patient and undismayed. For the sake of such 
a work they should be willing to renounce with 
cheerfulness those conveniences and enjoyments 
which would otherwise be lawful to them. But 
whatever may be their exertions or endurances, 
they should maintain that purity of heart which 
longs for and thinks of nothing but the honor 
and glory of God: that familiarity with the 
economy of grace which readily and clearly dis- 
cerns the Divine purposes and ways for saving 
men; and that forbearance and kindness, which 
can be learned and enjoyed only in the school of 
the Friend of Sinners. In all their course they 
should be controlled by the Holy Spirit shedding 
continually into their hearts that love of God, 
which produces and maintains a sincere love to 
men. Whatever they propose to their fellow- 
men will then bear the stamp of truth; and 
whatever they do will be accompanied by tokens 
of Divine power. In this manner they will prove 
themselves true champions of the Lord, boldly 
using the weapons of righteousness, now fear- 
lessly assailing whatever opposes Christ’s cause, 
and now rigorously defending the truth and laws 
of God against every form of sin and error. 
Everything will then also become subservient to 
their cause, and will more and more compel men 
to confess that they are from God. Honor and 
dishonor, good and evil report, will be equally in 
their favor. If they are sometimes represented 
as deceivers, it will not be hard to prove them- 
selves true men. If their adversaries disparage 
them as unknown, (obscure) they will soon prove 
themselves well known. If they are vilified as 
sinking, and devoted to death and ruin, they 
will ere long show themselves living monuments 
of saving and glorious grace. If they are pointed 


at as guilty objects of God’s frowns, they will | 


soon prove that their chastisement was not unto 
death. If they are sometimes looked upon with 
pretended sympathy, as men overwhelmed with 
sorrow, poor wretches, who can only starve for 
want of the necessities of life, they will soon 
show that they are not merely joyful in them- 
selves, and rich in spiritual blessings, but able 
also to enrich all their fellow men. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke:—Ve_er. 1. Since God has chosen min- 
isters to be his helpers in the work of the Gos- 
epl, let no one think himself too well taught and 


holy to need the services of those who seem to be 
inferior in endowments, for he can never know 
what instrument, or slight occasion God may have 
chosen fora work of grace in his heart.—Hxrpin- 
Ger :—Make use of the time you have, for the 
brief hour will soon be past. Whoever thrusts 
aside God’s grace, or loses it to secure some 
worldly advantage, draws down upon himself the 
severest judgments of God (Heb. ii. 8, xii. 15).— 
SpENER:—Ver, 2. God sometimes plentifully 
dispenses to men a grace, which will soon give 
place to wrath, if they fail to recognize and im- 
prove the time of their gracious visitation (Luke 
xix. 42 and 44.)  Thoughtless persons say: 


‘¢We shall have time enough to-morrow, and we. 


can turn to God even in death ;” but are they 
sure that God will then give them true repent- 
ance; that He will accept of the forced repent- 
ance of a dying hour; or that he will ever per- 
mit them to see another day ?—Ver. 4. A minis- 
ter’s whole life should be a practical illustration 
of what he enjoins upon others. (Tit. 11, 7f.) 
He who preaches to others that they must enter 
the kingdom of heaven only through much tribu- 
lation, must not expect to go before them upon 
roses. An effeminate weakling who can bear no 
trouble is not fit toserve Christ. In Christ’s ser- 
vice we shall be called upon to endure hardness 
and to stand by Christ and His word, under all 
the assaults of the devil and the world. But 
although such things are sometimes hard to bear, 
with Divine grace they become light. (Chap. iv. 8). 
—Ver. 5. Blessed are the peacemakers; cursed all 
rebels. Every hour has its work: God’s word 
is to be searched; our own house is to. be built, 
the sick are to be visited, and earnest prayer is 
to be offered for ourselves, and for allthe world! 
Think you this will disturb your peace? Never 
fear. For God the Lord will be thy rest and thy 
strength.—Ver. 6. A minister must cleanse him- 
self from all filthiness of the flesh and of the 
spirit (chap. vi. 1.) or he will pull down rather 
than build up. He who would teach others must 
know God, and be well acquainted with himself 
and his people (John x. ὃ and 14,)—A patient 
spirit is the inward light, and kindliness the 
outward beams of this sun.—Ver. 7. Behold, the 
true way to have the power, and the near pre- 
sence of God: It is to be so familiar with His 
word, that it shall become thoroughly implanted 
in our hearts, and engrafted into our spiritual 
life (James i, 21.) As a well-armed warrior 
carries weapons in both hands, is watchful on 
every side, and uses his weapons against every 
assault, we s' culd bring our spiritual weapons 
to bear aga’ cevery kind of temptation (from 
Satan or th. orld; from the lust of the flesh, 
the lust of 4+2eye and the pride of life; from 
fears, tri ations, persecution). Where Christ 
is, God’s power is; and with this we can tri- 





umph over all things. Through God we shall do 
valiantly (Ps. lx. 12; eviii. 13).—Ver. 8. Stand 
firmly in God’s grace when men reyile and seek 
to injure thee, and they will soon find that they 
dishonor themselves more than thee.—Ver. 9. 
In severe sickness men will say, ‘‘ Heis dying,” 
but with God’s help we cry, “" Behold I live!” 
Look well, that you may be able tosay, ““ Christ 
; liveth in me,” efe. (Gal. 11, 20.)—Hepinarr, Ver. 
. 10, God’s people have reason to mourn over their 


CHAP. VI. 1-10. 


113 


ttt 


sins, their sufferings, the buffetings of their 
deadly enemy, their fellowmen,’ the abominable 
crimes of their day, the perdition of thousands, 
and the genev‘al blindness and hardness of men’s 
hearts. But they can always rejoice in the 
Spirit, in God and in Christ, in a blessed hope, in 
foretastes of future glory, and that their names 
are written in heaven (Luke x. 10.) While we 


continue in God’s grace, we always truly parti- | 


cipate in, though we may not always be equally 
conscious of, its consolations. These, however, 
may always be increased hy constant prayer. 
They are spiritual, pure, uninterrupted, and the 
offspring of the spirit of God through spiritual 
graces. If they are sometimes connected with 
visible things, they are never dependent upon 
these, but are intended to lead us directly to 
God. It is for this reason that the enjoyment of 
them is so sanctifying. God’s true ministers, as 
spiritual fathers, enrich their people by their 
instructions, their example, their prayers, and 
their admonitions to good works and liberality 
(comp. Ist Tim. vi. 17 f.). He who has God has 
everything, for God will provide every needful 
temporal blessing. 

Berens. Brsre:—Ver. 1. A man must make 
a holy use of that grace by means of which he is 
first anointed with the Holy Spirit, justified, 
sanctified and turned to God; for if he makes it 
subservient to his fleshly lusts, or to his security 
in sin, and perverts it to his own pride and self- 
righteousness, instead of using it for his growth 
in grace and especially for being born into the 
kingdom of God, even that which he has already 
received will be withdrawn.—Ver. 2. The only 
proper result of grace already received is the 
hearing of our prayers, the healing of our back- 
slidings and the salvation of our souls. When 
Satan is most aroused, then is the time for pluck- 
ing souls from his grasp.—There are times in 
which God sees fit to give us more than common 
manifestations of His grace. Great will be our 
blessedness if we make a wise improvement of 
such seasons.—The deeper our impressions are, 
the greater the injury, if they are despised and 
resisted, and so our hearts are hardened against 
God. Every one should observe whether, and in 
what way Divine grace is acting upon his heart. 
If we walk not in the light while it is yet day, 
darkness will come upon us, and our perverted 
hearts will lead us to ruin.—When Satan can 
find an occasion for reproaching God’s children, 
and especially those who have the care of souls, 
he will be sure to make a mourtajn of it, and 
will corrupt the work of God. J “never is he 
more insulting than when he find ‘hem feeble 
and dispirited. Then he points’ ‘them and 
cries: ‘These are the Lord’s heroes’ _; An occa- 
sion for offence is thus given, not mrely when 
we commit some great crime, but when we make 
no advances, when we are slothful, cold-kearted, 
and indolent, and when the people do not see us 
in earnest.—Ver. 4 f. Where Christians are 
really zealous, they must expect to suffer. They 
must then beseech God for patience, and their 
prayers will keep them from falling.—God’s true 
messengers, and even Christians in general, may 
be distinguished from the world by their suffer- 


ings, and by their being looked upon by those | 





of all things and as a curse. There is no way in 
which they will not be assailed, in mind and 
body, in reputation or in property. They will 
be perplexed, crushed and beaten (afilictions),— 
Circumstances will arise when the servant of 
God will be in extreme distress, that as a good 
soldier of Jesus Christ, he may be an example to 
others of a firm trust in God.—Whoever is pre- 
paring for the pastoral office, must make it his 
first object to attain a degree of patience, which 
nothing but Divine power can give him.—Many 
have found evangelical fasting, when entered 
upon voluntarily at suitable times, and without 
affectation, very profitable, but any other will be 
found quite useless.—To abstain from an im- 
proper use of eyen those things which belong to 
us, will be an excellent means of purifying and 
disciplining us.—Ver. 6. The best protection 
against impure thoughts and desires, is to lgive 
ourselves thoroughly up to our ordinary emp oy- 
ments. Those who have once known how plea- 
sant a holy life is, must have an insatiable hun- 
gering after purity of heart. The best way to 
know and properly appreciate all things around 
us, is to gain such a familiarity with them as 
God gives us in the midst of Christian activity, 
and the trials and temptations to which it sub- 
jects us.—He is truly kind who is willing to give 
up himself when occasion calls for it, and to re- 
nounce his own enjoyments at the call of distress 
and love. This can be done, in a pure and 
blameless manner, when the heart has been 
thoroughly awakened and renewed so as to be 
holy before God, angels and men (by the Holy 
Ghost).—Many a thing comes to us under the 
semblance of Jove. But the Apostolic spirit was 
in truth also. The very nature of love is such 
that it makes brethren speak the truth.—Ver. 7. 
Truth must be defective if love is wanting. 
Where a man is actuated by Icve, he will honestly 
speak the truth, and of course will neither flatter 
nor needlessly offend or injure any one.—-If a 
man faithfully pursues his calling, thoroughly 
renounces the world, and by the aid of the Holy 
Spirit gives no offence, is sincere, pure, chaste, 
kind and true, he will possess power, (‘by the 
power of God”’) which no one can resist, and his 
faith will be the victory which overcomes the 
world. No one can do this who does not make 
good use of the weapons of righteousness. With 
these he can defend himself against all mischief 
from within or from without. God is wonderful 
in His resources!—Ver. 8. In itself it is a mat- 
ter of indifference to a Christian, whether men 
receive or reject him, if he only has the testi- 
mony of a good conscience, and has grace always 
to own his Lord.—Ver. 9. The dealings of God 
with His people are so fatherly, that, with all the 
humiliations and chastisements to which He sub- 
jects them, they are never given over to death. 
Ver. 10. Christians are not without tender feel- 
ings when they are in affliction, but they are so 
refreshed by supplies of grace that they can 
endure with cheerfulness. —None can understand 
how wonderful God’s goodness is but those who 
seek for and love Him; but so abundant will be 
the riches of knowledge which He gives, that 
many besides their possessors will be enriched, 
To have nothing, neither gold, nor possessions, 





who are esteemed in society, as the offscouring | etc., and yet to have all things so as to be unwill« 


8 


114 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ing to exchange conditions with the wealthiest 
of this world, are things so hard to be united, 
that nothing but Divine power can combine them 
together. 

Rizcsr:—Venr. 1f. If thou hast besought men 
to be reconciled to God, fail not to admonish 
them also, for even those who have been brought 
nigh to God by the word of reconciliation are 
still in danger. How often is grace obstructed, 
and the heart hardened rather than benefited.— 
“1 have heard thee,” οἷο. Such a promise was 
not for our great High Priest alone during the 
single hour of His soul’s travail (Isa. xlix. 8), 
but for those of every age and condition in whose 
behalf he then acted. His prayer for His disci- 
ples and for all who should afterwards believe on 
Him through their word, has been heard. The 
present, therefore, is-an acceptable time, e/c.— 
Ver. 38. Men are ingenious in contriving pretexts 
for receiving the grate of God in vain, especially 
if they can detect something in those who preach 
the Gospel inconsistent with their messages.— 
The minister of Christ must not expect entirely 
to escape scandal; but when the conscience of a 
hearer has been offended, so that the Gospel has 
no power over him, the cause is not unfrequently 
one which could and ought to have been avoided. 
The minister’s work should be to him as the very 
apple of his eye, to be kept most delicately from 
every contact with vice. Many of the judicial 
proceedings of the present day fail of success on 
both sides on account of the contempt and re- 
proach which rests upon the ministerial charac- 
ter (Mal. ii. 7-9). The salt which has lost its 
savor will be sure to be crushe:l under the feet of 
men. But even those who thus tread upon it 
must one day answer for being so easily deprived 
of that which might and ought to have been salt 
to them, and for being so speedily reduced to a 
carcass of corruption in God’s sight.—Ver. 4 
The best eye for judging all we dois acquired by 
having a desire in all things to act worthy of a 
servant of God.—A stupid, hesitating and timid 
spirit knows nothing of real patience. None but 
those who fear no terrors can maintain such a 
spirit under severe trials. 

Hrvuspner:—Ver. 1. To receive the grace of 
God (7. ¢., all that could save us) in vain, is the 
surest way to injure ourselves and to lose what 
we have. What an honor and blessedness to be 
God's helpers, and to give Him back the tongues 
and powers he gave us!—Ver. 2. The acceptable 
time is the whole period of the Christian dis- 
pensation, for salyation is now free to all, espe- 
cially all who hear the Gospel in its clearness 
and power. For every one it is now a day of 
salvation. Luraer:—‘‘The word of God moves 
along like a passing shower; wherever it comes 
it must be received at once, or it will be gone.” 
—How soon a man’s ‘not now” becomes a ‘*ne- 
ver.” How many are lost because they put off 
the day of their conversion !—Ver. 3. Christianity 
has always been much dishonored by the un- 
faithfulness and faults of some ministers whose 
scandalous walk pulls down faster than their 
preaching builds up. Most carefully, therefore, 
should they guard their conduct, for every defect 
in this will surely be noticed. No wonder, 
therefore, that the world is full of objections to 
those who preach the Gospel.—Vers. 4, 5. In 








performing the duties of your office, seek not te 
please yourself, or the world, but God. Faith- 
fulness to Him will be seen principally in the 
patient and persevering performance of the diffi- 
cult duties you have to do. Nothing is more in- 
dispensable to a minister of God, driven as he 
often must be into straits and with none to coun- 
sel him, than patience.—Ver. 6. The severer the 
opposition, the more honorable the virtues which 
are shown in encountering it: such as purity of 
heart, the ready tact and familiarity with Divine 
things which always hits upon the right thing; . 
the good will and courage which perseveres even 
when the results do not correspond to our expec- 
tations; the unwearied earnestness to benefit 
those who make no returns of gratitude and con- 
tinually thwart our pains; the kindness (the 
outward form of love) which endeavors to win 
all to Christ; the holy zeal which remains at all 
times equally constant, and has a heart for God’s 
work and man’s salvation; and the sincere love 
to all men which is the soul of all our graces.— 
Ver. 8. The equanimity of the Christian under 
the ever varying judgments of the world.—Ho- 
nors do not dazzle him, dishonors do not trouble 
him.—Ver. 9. ΤῸ be known by a few faithful 
friends, is better than to have a name with the 
multitude.—Ver. 10. The Christian, though poor 
in the eye of the world, has an inexhaustible 
treasure to dispense. With no earthly house or 
grounds, or possessions, he has a rich inheritance 
in heaven. With rapture he can cry: “ΜΥ heart 
leaps!” ete, (Luke vi. 23). ’ 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 1. God has seen fit to 
communicate to men the blessing of reconcilia- 
tion through the medium of His word and the 
preaching of the Gospel. Though He alone can 
impart the spirit of faith, and so work upon the 
heart that we shall come to Christ and find justi- 
fication and salvation, He dispenses His gifts and 
influences in connection with the outward word, 
and calls those who preach it His helpers or 
fellow-laborers (1 Cor. iii. 9).—Ver. 2. When 
Paul exclaims: ‘Behold, now,” etc., he must be 
understood as saying: ‘‘Open your eyes and be- 
hold that Gospel which has filled the world with 
the precious assurance that God is no more an- 
gry or punishing men, but is gracious and ready 
to save them; for our Lord Jesus, who has con- 
quered all our enemies, and now intercedes for 
us, has purchased us for Himself, and entreats 
us to be reconciled to God.” The whole period 
of the New Testament is an acceptable time 
(Luke iv. 19); when the buds of promise are 
bursting, and every day is a day of salvation, 
We are continually receiving and appropriating 
the results of our Saviour’s sufferings and victo- 
ries. Every Christian may therefore apply to 
himself the prophetic word, ‘I haye heard 
thee;” for if one is heard for all, then all are 
heard; and if one is sueccored for all, then all 
are succored.—Ver. 6. Among the virtues and 
gifts which distinguish God’s servants, we ought 
especially to remark the Holy Spirit. From this 
Source flow the streams of life, of virtues and of 
gifts both backward and forward in our text. 
He it is who washes the soul from every defile- 
ment, and then it begins to shine with intelli- 
gence, long suffering and kindness, and He it is 
who crowns these virtues with martial glories 


CHAP. VI. 11-17. VII. 1. 115 


Se _ -_ 
and entwines them together in a bond of peace. 
—vVer. 7. One part of the work to be accom- 
plished by the armour of righteousness on the 
right hand and on the left, is to strip from us the 
motley garment of our own righteousness, and 
triumphantly to maintain the génuineness and 
everlasting suitableness of the beautiful and 
glorious garment of Christ’s righteousness.— 
Ver. 9. When it is objected against the servants 
of Christ that they are obscure and insignificant, 
that they have no place among the wise, and no 
reputation or power in the world (1 Cor. i. 26- 
28), they are more than compensated by being 
well known in heaven (Luke x. 20; Phil. iv. 3; 
Heb. xii. 23) and in the Church below by all 
whom they have served with patience and with 
the humble graces of the Holy Spirit.—Ver. 10. 
Every thing on earth is subservient to the wel- 
fare of God’s servants; and the future dignities 
of the meek who inherit the earth (Matth. v. 5) 
may be traced even in this life, when heaven and 
earth are nothing but a vast storehouse, the key 
to whose treasures is continually given to faith 
by prayer. Away with pride and vanity! Let 
us dread poison when pious people praise us, and 
learn to find honey among the nettles of calumny 
and lies; for we have the assurance (Matth. νυ. 
11, 12). 

Ver. 1-10 (Pericore on Invocavit Sunday) :— 
The Lord glorified by His Apostles: 1, by their 
blameless deportment (vers. 1-4); 2, by their 
patience in sufferings (vers. 4, 5); ὃ, by their 
holy walk (vers. 6-7); 4, by the benefits they con- 
fer.—The Apostles are like their Lord: 1, in 





their work as preachers and their holy walk: 2, 
in sufferings, not only under positive inflictions, 
but under privations ; 8, in their excellent influ- 
ence, inasmuch as they make use of none but 
honorable means —A season of Fasting a time of 
salvation: 1. For we should regard it as a time: 
a. to awake to the reception of God’s grace, as 
we contemplate the story of Christ’s sufferings 
(vers. 1-2); 6. to become more holy in our daily 
lives (vers. 3-4); 6. to make use of the trials of 
life, for the exercise of every Christian virtue 
(vers. 4-6); d. to receive the spiritual aids which 
are offered us. 2. Beneficial influence of the 
truths then contemplated: a. for our amendment 
of life and our confirmation in holiness; ὦ. for 
our real comfort and peace; c. for the increase 
of our influence among our fellow-men.—Our 
whole life on earth is a season of fasting; for it 
is a time: 1, of suffering; 2, of many privations; 
ὃ, of discipline in holiness; 4, of preparation for 
the great Easter, when we shall be raised from 
the dead and saved forever (Heubner). 

L. HoracKker (pp. 80 ff.):—In the midst of all 
their outward afflictions, their insignificance and 
their vileness in the eye of the world, those who 
follow Christ and labor in His vineyard must ex- 
pect to be reviled; but in spite of all their suf- 
ferings and shame, a Divine greatness and ma- 
jesty will break forth from them, amply sufficient 
to prove the reality of the kingdom for which 
they are contending.—The hidden glories of 
God’s kingdom: 1. That kingdom has a glory. 2. 
But it is now concealed: a. in Christ Himself; ὁ. 
in His Church. 


XII.—AN EARNEST APPEAL TO THE CORINTHIANS; APPLICATION OF THE EXHOR- 
TATION IN VER. 1. 


Cuarter VI. 11-17. VII.-1. 


1. O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our’ heart is [has become] en- 
12 larged. Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels. 
13 Now for a recompense in the same [by way of recompense in the same kind, τὴν δὲ 
14 αὐτήν ἀντιμισθίαν] (1 speak as unto my children), be ye also enlarged. Be ye not un- 
equally yoked together [become not united as ina strange yoke, μὴ γίνεσθε ἑτεροξυγοῦν- 
τες] with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? 
15 and for]? what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath 
Christ? with Belial [Beliar]?* or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel 
16 [unbeliever]? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye 
[we]® are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and 
walk in [among] them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my® people. 
17 Wherefore come out’ from among them, and be ye separate [separated] saith the 
Lord, and touch not the unclean thing [anything unclean]; and I will receive you, 
and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my [to me for, μοι εἰς] sons and 
daughters saith the Lord Almighty. 


VII. 1. Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all 
filthiness [every defilement] of the [om. the] flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the 
fear of God. 


110 


[1 Ver. 11.-- For the second ἡμῶν B. has ὑμῶν. Tisch. in his Cod. Sin. gives ἡμῶν in the text, but ὑμῶν as a var. lect.]. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





2 Ver. 14.—Rece. has ris δὲ, but ἢ τίς has stronger support (B.C. Ὁ. E. F. α. L. Sin. with the majority of versions and 


Fathers}. 


The δέ being more usual was probably a correction. 


D i ὶ he other datives in the connec- 
3 Ver, 15.—Rec. hi τῷ, but it was probably a correction to conform to φωτὶ and t ) 
tion. B.C. ot al. [Sinait. Ὁ. L. the Vulg., and Copt. the Latin fathers] have χριστοῦ. {Lachm., sper eg Fe a8 A 
also adopt it; but Bloomfield inclines to χριστῷ under an impression that the other was suggested by the p 


to facilitate coustruction). 


4 Ver. 15.—The best authenticated form of this word is BeAcap; but some copies have βελίαν and βελίαβ. The βελῖαλ 


f the Ree. is feebly sustained. t 
hate form. All Greek MSS. of importance have βελίαρ. 


ὃ ISS. and little more than the Vulgate, which adopted it from the original He 
Sra sept. treated the word as @comuon noun and translated it. 


The Vulgate and our English version sometimes give it as a proper noun, but they often translate it by the word wicked, 


or some equivalent term. 


The Hellenistic Jews often changed A into p,as in the Doric φαῦρος for φαῦλος. 


The form 


βελίαρ often occurs in the Test. of the 12 Patriarchs, in the interpolated Ignatius, in the Apost. Canons. and in the Greek 


Fathers generally. 


As ‘he Greeks never ended their proper names 1m p, they were not likely to change βελίαλ into BeAtap, 


while the Latins were quite likely to conform the BeAcap to their Vulgate]. 


5 Ver. 16.—The Kec has ὑμεῖς---ἐστε instead of ἡμεῖς---ἐσμὲν. 
vate The authorities, however, are about equally balance d. 


attempt to conform to vv. 14 and 17. 


It was probably a reminiscence of 1 Cor. iii. 16, and an 
[B. Ὁ. L. Sin. and some ver- 


sions and Fathers have the Rec, but C. Ὁ. (3d Cor.) Εἰ. F. α. Κα. the Vulg. Syr. Goth. verss. and most of the Greek Fathers 


have the other. 
been suggested for the opposite course}. 

6 Ver. 16.—Rec. has or, Lachm. has pov. 
conform the text to the preceding αὐτῶν. 
Fathers have μοι]. 


7 Ver. 17 —Rec. has ἐξέλθετε but εξελθατε is better suited to the sense and is more strongly sustained. 


No reason can be imagined for changing the ὑμεὶς into ἡμεῖς equally strong with that which has above 


The testimony for the latter is not strong, and it is probably an attempt to 
{And yet B.C. and Sin have μον, while D. F. K. L. with the verss, and most 


{The former is 


i isti ὃ 8 " thi ᾿ Σ; less likely to be altered to it, it is better sus 
better conformed to linguistic usage, but the latter was for this very reason ; é Σ 
pained hy the best MSS. of the Sept., has B. C. F. G. Sin. and Damase. in its favor, and has the sanction of Lachm., Tisch. 


and Alford]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 11-13. Our mouth is open toward 
you, O Corinthians, our hearts are en- 
larged.—Before particularly applying to the 
Corinthians in their various relations (ver. 14ff) 
the admonition he had given them in ver. I f., 
the Apostle pauses to pour forth to them the 
feelings which had been rising in his heart. 
We have first a continued expression of the emo- 
tions called forth by the preceding representa- 
tion, and then the earnest exhortation which 
commences with ver. 14. The words to open the 
mouth, signify properly, to begin to speak, but 
they are here especially emphatic (in consequence 
of their connection with what had been said in 
ver. 3ff. and what follows regarding the enlarge- 
ment of his heart). The idea thus becomes, to 
speak openly and without reserve (comp. Eph. 
vi. 19 and Ecclus. xxii. 22). [Curysostom: 
*“‘we cannot be silent; we long to be continually 
speaking and conversing with you]. ΒΥ such 
language, he shows how confiding was his love 
towards them, A similar thought is expressed 
when he adds, our heart is enlarged. [Cury- 
sostom: ‘As that which warms is wont to 


dilate, so also to enlarge the heart is the work ἢ 


of love. It opens the mouth and enlarges the 
heart, for he loved not with the heart only, but 
with the heart in unison. He says with great 
emphasis, we have not only room for you all, but 
with such largeness of room, as he that is be- 
loved walketh with great unrestraint within the 
heart of him that loveth”]. As Paul had been 
opening his inmost soul to his brethren in the 
free and confiding manner of the last few sen- 
tences he had himself become conscious of the 
extent of his affection for them (Meyer, comp. 
Osiander), 
needed in the second sentence. The words should 
not be understood to mean simply (comp. ver. 
12 f.) that he felt happy and comfortable, or that 
he had now disclosed his whole heart and un- 
bosomed himself to them.—The special address 
to them (kopivtior), without either article or ad- 
jective, isa mode of speaking which occurs only 
in one passage beside (Phil. iy. 15), and indi- 
cates the profound sincerity of the speaker, — 





This is the reason that no γάρ was’ 


The same idea is presented in a negative form in 
ver. 12, and so makes the contrast on the part 
of the Corinthians more striking—ye are not 
straitened in us but ye are straitened in 
your own bowels (ver. 12).—The ov shows 
that the verb cannot be taken as an imperative 
even in the first clause. [WxBsTER (p. 188): 
‘ob conveys a direct and absolute, μὴ ἃ subjec- 
tive and conditional, denial.” Winer, ᾷ 59, 1]. 
It is not of anxiety or sadness, the reason of 
which is in themselves, that he is speaking. The 
meaning of ‘straitened’ is determined by its 
connection with the subsequent idea of enlarge- 
ment: ye are not straitened, 7. 6. ye have no 
contracted space in our hearts; but in your hearts 
it is not so with respect tous; ὦ. 6. ye have no 
small room in us, but ye have very small room 
for us in yourselves. While our hearts are 
enlarged in love for you, it is very different with 
you, in respect to us. [Curysostrom: ‘This re- 
proof is administered with forbearance, as is the 
manner of very great love. He does not say, 
‘ye do not love us,’ but ‘not in the same mea- 
sure,’ for he does not wish to touch them too 
sensibly. He implies that they have some affec- 
tion for him, that he may win them to more. Ye 
are straitened while [am enlarged. Ye barely 
receive one and even him with small space, but 
I a whole city, and with abundance of freedom.” ] 
Σπλάγχνα (bowels) is here used, as in chap. vii. 
15; Phil. i. 8; ii. 1, and even in classical 
writers, in the sense of καρδία (heart), for the 
seat of the emotions, such as love, sympathy, — 
ete, [The Apostle in this passage uses both 
words, καρδία and σπλάγχνα for the affections. 
In modern languages the latter word has been 
entirely superseded by the former. Among 
ancient nations, however, it expressed the whole 
interior structure of man, including especially 
the heart and liver as opposed to what are now 
technically called the bowels (ἔντερα, Stanley), 
In classical Greek the word is used for the feel- 
ings generally, and in Hebrew the corresponding 
DOM") was used to designate the seat of the 
a She ae 


gentler emotions and affections. The name itself 
in Hebrew was derived from a root which signi- 
fies to love. Comp. Stanley].—Now by way 
of recompense in the same (I speak as 






VE SS oe 


CHAP. VI. 11-17. VII. 1. 





unto my children), be ye also enlarged 
(ver. 13).—In close connection with what he had 
just said, he now proceeds to demand of them 
that their hearts should also be enlarged, that 
they should ‘‘open widely their hearts in love 
and confidence for him as he had opened his for 
them. The motive for this he derives from the 
nature of children, when he adds, I speak as unto 
children (comp. 1 Cor. iv. 14); imasmuch as 


children are bound to make a return of love for | 


a father’s love (comp. 1 Tim. v. 4). This idea 
is more distinctly brought out when he directly 
calls upon them for their love as an appropriate 
recompense (ἀντεμισϑία, comp. Rom. i. 27; but in 
our passage the word is strengthened by the use 
of τὴν αὐτήν). The construction is here abrupt 
(Meyer calls it a rhetorical anacoluthon [Kihner 
ἃ 347, 5, Winer 3 64, II. note]). In order to fill 
out the expression, however, we must supply 
neither ἔχοντες, nor εἰσενέγκατε; nor must we 
connect the words together by λέγω (qg. d. I am 
speaking for an adequate recompense), but we 
‘must regard it as an Accus. absol., an anacolu- 
thon, occasioned by the parenthesis in which he 
had paused to say he was speaking as to chil- 
dren. Others regard it as the Accusative of the 
remote effect: that by which ye should make re- 
compense. In τὴν αὐτὴν ἀντιμισϑίαν, the two ideas 
of the same thing (τὸ αὐτὸ) and of remuneration 
(ἀντιμισϑία) are blended together by way of 
attraction. 
αὐτὸ (ὡσαύτως), ὃ ἐστιν ἀντιμισϑίαᾳ. [FRITZSCHE: 
‘With his accustomed celerity of thought Paul 
says, τὴν δὲ αὐτὴν ἀντιμισθίαν instead of τὸ dé 
αὐτὸ, 6 ἐστιν ἀντιμισθία, πλατύνθητε, enlarge your 
minds to the same remuneration, instead of, to 
the same thing (love) in which a remuneration 
might be found.” Comp. Jer, Gram. ἢ 581, 1, 3 
700, Obs. 1 and 2]. 

Vers. 14-18. [An admonition to separate them- 
selves from unbelievers. Stanley calls this passage 
a remarkable dislocation of the train of argu- 
ment. On the one hand, the passionate appeal 
begun in vi. 11-13 is continued without even the 
appearance of an interruption in vii. 2, where the 
words χωρήσατε ἡμᾶς (make room for us) are evi- 
dently the prolongation of the metaphor expressed 
in vi. 12, 13, by στενοχ. and πλατύνθητε. On the 
other hand, the intervening passage (vi. 14—yii..1), 
while it coheres perfectly with itself, has no con- 
nection with the immediate context either before 
or after. Such an introduction of an earnest 
warning in the midst of an affectionate entreaty, 
need not, however, suggest the idea of an inter- 
polation of some passage from one of Paul’s 
lost Epistles, or by some other hand; for it is the 
very nature of a love so ardent, so aroused at the 
moment, and now touched with some jealousy, 
to make sudden transitions, and to draw towards 
itself by warnings of danger as well as by ex- 
pressions of endearment]. Probably not without 
reference to his demand that they should be en- 
larged toward him (ver. 13), the Apostle now pro- 
ceeds earnestly to warn them against a kind of 
false enlargement of heart which had been shown 
in an improper fellowship with Gentiles, and in 
consenting to heathenish customs.—Become 
not united heterogeneously with unbe- 
lievers.—It is possible that he had reference 
especially to sacrificial festivals and to mixed 


They may be separated thus: 70° 





117 


= 1 


marriages. ‘Erepofuyetv ἀπίστοις implies unques- 
tionably a communion (it is joined therefore with 
the dative); but it involves also the idea of an 
unequal union. It is taken from the figure, not 
of a balance, where there is an inclination toward 
one side, representing a disposition favorable to 


'unbelievers (Theophylact, et a/.), nor of oars 


which are not paired or properly mated, but of 8 
yoke in which animals are intended to draw to- 
gether. Comp. érepéfvya in the Sept. of Lev. 
xix. 19; Deut. xxii. 10. Two animals of a dif- 
ferent nature, harnessed together in the same 
yoke, are a type of Christians having fellowship 
with heathen. W. F. Besser says that Paul here 
derives a spiritual lesson from the legal precept 
which prohibits the putting of clean and unclean 
animals in the same team, to the effect that 
Christians should not be joined with others. The 
ἕτερον, however, should not be made to refer to 
the yoke itself, as if it meant “put not on a 
foreign yoke, one which unbelievers have put on, 
and therefore one which does not belong to 
Christians” (Meyer). The admonition evidently 
points to something habitual, and probably was 
intended to imply that their conduct had tenden- 
cies in that direction. Neander says that ‘* Paul 
evidently would not have spoken in this way of 
that unavoidable intercourse with the heathen 
which only served to make Christianity better 
known to them; but he referred merely to a par- 
ticipation with them in social usages and excesses. 
Nothing in this text confines the application of it 
to marriages with the heathen.”’—The Apostle 
now proceeds to justify his admonition by a se- 
ries of five questions, in which he endeavors to 
conyince his brethren of the incompatibility of 
the Christian and heathenish systems. Such an 
accumulation of questions is very emphatic and 
impressive. In the first place, he inquires— 
For what participation hath righteous- 
ness with unrighteousness ?—He thus cha- 
racterizes these systems by the opposite words, 
righteousness and unrighteousness (δικαιοσύνη 
and ἀνομία) The former signifies, not the righte- 
ousness of faith in the theological sense of the 
expression, but the active disposition to a Divine 
life which springs from a vital union by faith 
with Christ; and the latter signifies that com- 
plete want of such a righteousness which is seen 
in the heathen world, where the living God is 
unknown, and where there is no Divine life. The 
same idea is expressed figuratively in the second 
question— W hat communication hath light 
with darkness ?—in which φῶς and σκότος are 
contrasted. Comp. Eph. νυ. 8. W. F. Bressrr: 
«These five casuistic questions are so arranged 
that the two first relate to the separation between 
salvation and destruction, the third to the sepa- 
ration between the Saviour and the destroyer, 
and the two last to the separation between the 
saved and the destroyed.” Light is the figura- 
tive expression for truth and purity (the intel- 
lectual and the moral element united); and 
darkness, is the common metaphor for error and 
wrong conduct (Greg. Naz. makes ¢@¢—=yvaore καὶ 
βίος ἔνϑεος, oxéTo¢—=ayvoia καὶ ἁμαρτία). Μετοχή 
has the same meaning as κοινωνία (Luther trans- 
lates it Geniess=(Cenossenschaft, 7. e., enjoyment 
in the sense of fellowship. [Srantey: ‘“ Of the 
five words used to express the idea of union, 


118 





μετοχῆ, κοινωνία, συμφώνησις, μερὶς, συγκατάϑεσις, 
only the third and fifth have any special appro- 
priateness, and those chiefly by their etymology; 
συμφώνησις, ‘harmony of voice,’ is appropriate to 
persons, and συγκατάϑεσις, ‘unity of composition,’ 
to buildings. The multiplication of synonyms 
implies a greater copiousness of Greek than 
we should expect from the Apostle’s usual 
language. Wesster and WiLkinson: “ Believers 
are here spoken of, first in the abstract 
(light, righteousness, Eph. v. 8), then in their 
Head, then individually, then as a commu- 
nity (ναός). The use of καὶ represents the act 
of communication as mutual, of πρὸς as offering a 
connection, of μετὰ as accepting it” ]. For the 
meaning of κοινωνία by classical writers and by 
Philo, consult Meyer.—And what concord 
hath Christ with Beliar? (ver. 15). This 
question, which follows the first pair, is intro- 
duced by a dé, which shows that it is an emphatic 
continuance of what had gone before it. [ Alford: 
“After a question beginning with πῶς, τίς, and 
the like, a second question is regularly introduced 
bya δέ". We here rise to the two great chiefs 
of the opposing departments (comp. 1 Cor. x. 
20; Eph. ii. 2).---Βελίαρ is the same as Satan, by 
which word the Peschito translates it; the same 


bya, worthlesness, 


wickedness. Even in the Sibylline books and in 
the Apocryphal writings of the Old Testament it 
was used as one of Satan’s names. In the com- 
mon Hellenistic dialect, in the “Test. of the 
Twelve Patriarchs,” and in the writings of the 
Eccles, Fathers the letters 2 and p were fre- 
quently interchanged. [Jerome derives the word 


also as πονηρός, Heb. 


from ““ §y—non, and by paiugum, 2. €., absque 


jugo, quod de collo suo Dei abjecerit servitutem.” 
It is, however, more generally derived from the 
’ ξ δ 


former word, and Dy =usefulvess, zt. 6., with- 


out usefulness, and hence, wickedness. Jerome’s 
derivation of the word may account for Paul’s 
use of it in connection with ἑτεροζυγοῦντες. But 
with the other derivation we have a still better 
connection. On the stand-point of the Jews and 
the N. T., idolatry was a worship of demons (1 
Cor. x. 20), and the name Beliar, both on its ne- 
gative and positive side, fits this view, inasmuch 
as an idol was a dead and useless thing, and the 
system of idolatry was the concentrated effect of 
the devil’s art and power. Bengel thinks that 
Paul here calls Satan Beliar, but that Satan, as 
opposed to Christ, denotes all kinds of antichris- 
tian uncleanness (omnem colluviem antichristia- 
nam). Συμφώνησις occurs only here in the N. T., 
and never in the Septuagint. In the classical 
authors it has the form of συμφωνία πρός. It has 
the meaning here of, agreement together, accord- 
ance of sentiment and feeling, harmony in opin- 
ions and efforts.—Or what part hath he that 
believeth with an unbéliever, and what 
agreement hath the temple of God with 
idols ?—In this last pair of questions the Apos- 
tle comes down from the heads of these two great 
departments to those connected respectively with 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


—_——- 


have no such faith. Mepic here, as in Acts viii. 
21, has the sense of share, portion or property. 
The two parties have no common advantages; 
one has nothing in common with the other, and 
their possessions are entirely different, the one 
from the other. In ver. 16, however, a question 
is asked which sets in the clearest possible light 
the holiness of Christianity in contrast with the 
impurities of heathenism. The Christian com- 
munity is there represented as a temple of God, 
and surely there could be no agreement between 
it and idols! Such a contradiction was there 
between them, that all fellowship would seem im- 
possible and all contact a desecration. Συγκατά- 
ϑεσις has generally the meaning of assent, ac- 
quiescence, but here it has the more particular 
signification of agreement. Comp. συγκατατίϑεσϑαι 
μετά in Exod. xxiii. 1; Luke xxiii. 51. With re- 
spect to the temple of God, comp. 1 Cor. iii. 16. 
It is certainly most natural to make this passage 
refer to such participations in idolatrous customs 
as are censured in 1 Cor. viii. 10. Christians 
should as soon think of allowing idols to be set 
up in the sanctuary of God, as to permit such 
things among those who had been consecrated to 
the Lord. These should be looked upon as pro- 
fanations like some which took place during the 
most corrupt periods of the Old Testament.— 
For we are the temple of the living God. 
—From the figures he had employed, and from 
the language used in the Scriptures, it was evi- 
dent that believers were a temple of God. Ne- 
ander remarks that ‘‘The particular, external 
relations of the Old Testament are here applied 
in a spiritual manner to each Christian.” The 
γάρ implies that the admonition involved in this 
question (τίς dé συγκατάϑεσις, etc.) is applicable 
tous; for we are indeed the temples, ete. Θεοῦ 
ζῶντος is a designation of the true God who will 
in contrast with dead and powerless idols be al- 
ways truly active to vindicate the honor of His 
sanctuary and to communicate living power to 
all His people (comp. 1 Thess. i. 9.) The same 
expression occurs also in chap. iii. 8; Heb. iii. 
12; ix. 14; x. 31, οἱ al.—As God said, I will 
dwellin them, and walk among them; and 
I will be their God, and they shall be to me 
a people.—The Apostle here shows that his re- 
presentation of the Church as a temple of God 
was justified by a passage in Levit. xxxvi. 11 f. 
(comp. Ezek. xxxvii. 27), which is here cited 
freely from memory. He uses the word ἡμεῖς 
very naturally in the most enlarged sense, and 
we find nothing strange in the fact that he should 
address them in the parenthetic clause before he 
communicates the instruction). The Apostle 
considers the idea of a temple involved in the 
expression, I will dwell (have a habitation, évoc- 
«how ἐν αὐτοῖς) in them. In the Sept. the pas. 
sage reads: ϑήσω τὴν σκηνήν μου ἐν ὑμῖν. Although 
ἐν has primarily the sense of: among, in the 
midst of, as it afterwards has in ἐμπεριπατήσω, the 
Apostle probably had reference to the presence 
of God in the individual believer (comp. John 
xiv. 23), inasmuch as the idea of ναὸς ϑεοῦ was 
in his mind, and the word ἕνοικεῖν most naturally 
implies this. The word ἐμπεριπατεῖν which was 
at first used to describe the movements of God’s 


them, and assumes that one who has faith in | residence (the sacred tabernacle) among the Is- 
Christ can have no part (μερίς) with such as} raelites, is here probably applied to the presence 


CHAR ἘΙΞΙΕΝΙ.: 
eR ee πὰ νι 


of God HimSelf in His Church in all parts of the 
world (comp. Rey. ii. 1). The promise contained 
in this quotation contains the sum of God’s cove- 
nant with His people, comp. Ex. vi. 7; Jere. xxiv. 
fe πεν. 22; Kxxi. 1 88. Heb. viii. 10; Rev: 
xxi. 3, 7. On God’s part there is the communi- 
cation of Himself and the benefits of His salva- 
tion; and on the part of the people there is fel- 
lowship with God and the enjoyment of His 
blessing. W. F. Besser remarks that ‘‘ God dwells 
in His Church when He fills it with His Spirit, 
through the instrumentality of His word and 
Sacraments; and as He thus finds an acceptable 
rest among them (Ps. cxxxii. 14), their spiritual 
influence proves that He is present in their midst 
and acknowledges as His own all who are recon- 
ciled to Him by Christ's blood. God walks in 
His Church when He acts there as its God 
through the gifts, ofices and powers which He 
bestows upon it; and when he receives His peo- 
ple into living fellowship and applies to them all 
the benefits of His gracious covenant.’”’ In Levit. 
xxyi. this promise is conditional and even here 
the admonition is itself a hint that their safety 
depended upon their fidelity, and especially upon 
their separation from ungodly persons and all 
impure practices; ver. 17, comp. ver. 14. This 
admonition He expresses ina free quotation of a 
passage in Isaiah lii. 11, in which the people 
were commanded +o leaye Babylon.—Where- 
fore come out from among them, and be 
separated, saith the Lord, and touch not 
any thing unclean.—W. F. Besser says that 
«The departure of the Israelites from Babylon 
was a redemption, a type (like that of the de- 
parture out of Egypt) of the great redemption of 
which the Apostle speaks (Gal. i. 4), when he 
says that Christ gave Himself for our sins, that 
He might deliver us from this present evil 
world.” The admonition here is that they should 
come out in the most decided manner from the 
whole sphere of heathenish worldly life, should 
separate themselves in spirit from their heathen 
neighbors, should avoid all heathenish practices 
which might defile men consecrated to God, and 
especially should abstain from all idolatrous fes- 
tivals —And I will receive you.—This is an 
obvious reminiscence of Ezek. xx. 84; Zech. x. 
8 ‘(not a free quotation of καὶ ὁ ἐπισυνάγων ὑμᾶς 
κύριος, Isa. lii. 12), and has reference to the 
adoption, of which he is about to speak further 
in ver. 18. Bengel makes it a correlative to 
εξέλϑετε, those who should come out would he re- 
ceived as if into a new family or home.—And I 
will be for a Father unto you, and ye shall 
be sons and daughters unto me saith 
the Lord Almighty (ver. 18).—This is proba- 
bly a free and amplified quotation of 2 Sam. vii. 
14 (hardly of Jer. xxxi. 9, and still less of Isa. 
xliii. 6). The words sons and daughters are a hint 
at the religious equality of the sexes under the 
reign of Christianity. Grotius thinks that these 
words (ver. 16-18) are taken from some hymn. 
The whole citation is solemnly closed with the 
affirmation, saith the Lord Almighty (λέγει κύριος 
ὁ παντοκράτωρῚ, taken from the Sept of 2 Sam. 
vii. 8. The expression occurs frequently in the 
Apocalypse, but only here in the writings of 
Paul; and it corresponds in the Septuagint to 


the Heb, Nixay Γ᾽; the Lord of Hosts, 








119 





[‘‘ The concluding verses of thie chapter are an 
instructive illustration of the way in which the 
New Testament writers quote the Old. J. They 
often quote a translation which does net strictly 
adhere to the original. 2. They often quote ac- 
cording to the sense, and not according to the 
letter. 3. They often blend together different 
passages of Scripture, so as to give the sense, not 
of any one passage, but the combined sense cf 
several, 4. They sometimes give the sense, not 
of any particular passage or passages, but, so to 
speak, the general sense of Scripture. There is 
no such passage in the Old Testament, for exam- 
ple, as that contained in this last verse, but the 
sentiment is often and clearly expressed. 5. 
They never quote as of authority any but the 
canonical books of the Old Testament”? Hopage]. 


Cuap. VII. 1.—Hfaving therefore these 
promises, let us purify ourselves from 
every defilement of flesh and spirit.—In 
this passage the Apostle, in a more conciliatory 
tone (and with the Corinthians associated with 
himself as brethren in the first person plural) 
connects with the promises he had quoted in 
chap. vi. 16-18, an earnest exhortation that they 
would aim at a course of conduct worthy of such 
exalted promises, [The inference he thus makes 
is applicable not merely to some part of God’s 
people which had become involved in unhallowed 
associations, but to all; and hence he includes 
even himself in the exhortation. He introduces 
also a word of endearment (ἀγαπητοί), which 
perceptibly indicates that he was subsiding into 
his usual calmness of spirit]. The promises to 
which he had been speaking had been given to 
the whole body of the Church; and as members 
of that Church they already possessed them 
(present ἔχοντες) by faith, inasmuch as even 
those which referred to the future were really as 
certain as those which were already realized. 
The main substance of them related to a personal 
communion with a God of absolute purity. A 
full realization of them would require on man’s 
part a complete renunciation of every thing in- 
consistent with the Divine nature, and an earnest 
pursuit after perfect holiness. Καϑαρίζειν signi- 
fies, not, to remain free from contamination after 
having once been purified (Olshausen), but, as 
the uniform usage of the N. T. shows, to purify. 
[For the original idea involved in καϑαρὸς, comp. 
Trench. Synn. p. 175]. The object of this puri- 
fication, which could never be accomplished 
without the aid of an indwelling Divine Spirit 
(comp. Rom. viii. 18; comp. ver. 9; Gal. v. 16; 
Phil. ii. 13), was, every defilement of the outer 
and innerman. The former includes every kind 
of voluptuousness, intemperance, etc., by means 
of which the body would be corrupted; and the 
latter includes thoughts, desires, affections (an- 
ger, pride, etc.) by means of which the human 
spirit (πνεῦμα) is defiled. In actual life these 
two classes of defilements are never separated, 
for as the mental very easily become the fleshly, 
the seeds of the fleshly are found originally in 
the mental. He uses the word σαρκός, and not 
σώματος, because it is only as σάρξ that the body 
is the sedes et fomes, the seat and the igniter of 
sin, and hence the flesh (σάρξ) is that to which 
every bodily defilement ethically adheres (Meyer). 
The spirit (πνεῦμα) as we have often seen in 1 


190 





Cor., denotes that spiritual nature which is kin- 
dred with God, and which in Christians is under 
the influence of, and is more or less directed by, 
the Holy Ghost. But as the action of this spirit 
may be much impeded or arrested by the defile- 
ments here spoken of, the work of purification 
was rendered continually necessary by the per- 
petual presence of the flesh, and any want of 
earnestness in the work of purification was an 
urgent reason for admonition (Osiander). An- 
cient as well as modern commentators (even 
Osiander) assume that the Apostle had a particu- 
lar ‘reference to crimes of which the Corinthians 
had been actually guilty (comp. chap. vi. 14 f.; 
xii. 20 f.; 1 Cor. vy. 6). In this case the pollu- 
tions of the flesh would refer to unchastity, and 
those of the spirit to connections with idolatry. 
Both. of these were intimately related (comp. 
Acts xv. 29), and in fact may be referred to 
idolatry, which is so often named in the Old Tes- 
tament spiritual harlotry. But not only the ad- 
dition of παντός, but the positive contrast im- 
plied, induces us to adopt the more general ap- 
plication; though we do not deny that the Apos- 
tle may have had some reference to the particu- 
lar sins to which this interpretation alludes. 
The positive part of the exhortation is—perfect- 
ing holiness in the fear of God.—'Aywwoivy 
(holiness) is here, as in Rom. i. 4; 1 Thess, iii. 
18, and in the Sept. of Ps. xevi. 6 and xevii. 12, 
the same as ἁγιασμός (comp. on 1 Cor. 1 30); with 
the sense of the quality, and not merely the ac- 
tion, of holiness. [Webster: ‘‘dycoovvy differs 
but little from ἁγεότης (2 Cor. i. 12; Heb. xii. 10), 
except perhaps it represents more the condition 
than the abstract quality; while dysacud¢ (1 
Thess. iv. 8, 4; 1 Pet. i. 2) points primarily to 
the process and thence, with the gradual approach 
of the termination in—yéc to that in-civy which 
is so characteristic of the N. T., the state, frame 
of mind, or holy disposition, in which the action 
of the verb is evinced or exemplified’ ]. The 
great moral business of the Christian (comp. 
Rom. vi. 22) is to complete (ἐπετγελεῖν, chap. viii. 
6) the work of holiness or consecration to God 
which was begun in faith as its principle, and 
must be actualized, developed and perfected 
during the whole life. The correlative of this is 
the Divine perfection which is referred to in 
Phil. i. 6. This perfecting of holiness is the at- 
tainment of complete holiness, and is a work of 
the whole life which we live in the flesh (Gal. ii. 
20); and can never reach an absolute completion 
until the close of life. It must, however, be ac- 
complished in the fear of God. The spiritual 
ground of all this moral activity, this earnest 
pursuit of holiness on which depends all fellow- 
ship with God, is a profound veneration or reve- 
rence for that Holy One who is continually pre- 
sent with us, and from whom nothing is con- 
cealed. ‘* This,” as Meyer says, ‘‘is the ethical 
and holy sphere within which righteousness is 
perfected.” 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. , 


The absolute purity of that God who enters 
into such intimate relationships with his people 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





regard them all as his sons and daughters, re- 
quires that they should be unreservedly conse 
crated to Him. By their very connection with 
Him they must continually receive a stream of 
influences by which the grossest or the slightest 
impurities whether of the flesh or Spirit must be 
washed away. Those who have entered into the 
great scheme of God’s mercy, should therefore 
have no part with those who entirely reject or 
practically abjure it. They have covenanted to 
walk with a God who is nothing but light, and 
they should have no fellowship with darkness, ἢ, 
e. with the corrupt practices of men estranged 
from the life of God. They belong to Christ, and 
they should abhor and renounce every thing 
which looks like partnership with the Belial who 
is the very ideal of all worthlessness and vile- 
ness. They in whom God condescends to dwell 
should have no semblance of harmony with the 
world’s idolatry. Every attempt to unite to- 
gether what is so unlike is an abomination to God 
and hurtful to souls. Under no circumstances 
can it really promote the cause of God, for it 
tends always to obliterate the distinction which 
God has taken pains to make prominent, and to 
make the requirement of a renovation of heart 
seem needless. How could those who are in the 
broad road be alarmed, if they were to see that 
believers had the same spirit with themselves. 
The work of God would thus be hindered by a 
false liberality. Let any one on the other hand 
consider what God is doing for the welfare of 
His people, and what an exalted thing it is to 
have fellowship with God, and he will have such 
a sense of God’s holy presence and of the gra- 
cious privileges of adoption, that he will careful- 
ly abstain from everything inconsistent with this 
sacred relationship. If he should at any time 
contract external or internal defilement, he will 
strive by every means to purify himself from it, 
and to bring his entire heart and life into con- 
formity with his true dignity as a follower of 
Christ. Never will such a one remit his efforts 
to attain perfect holiness until he shall become a 
complete man after the likeness of Him who could 
say, “1 do always those things which please the 
Father ” (Jno. viii. 29). 

[Nothing in this section should be used, as it 
often is, to justify or require a separation from 
those portions of the visible church in which 
some degree of corruption is found to prevail. 
The Apostle had reference only to communities 
which were essentially unchristian, yea, as op- 


posite to Christianity as light is to darkness, ido-_ 


latry to the true religion. He would never 
have sanctioned any separation from the visible 
church (1 Cor. i. 10; iii. ὃ; xii. 25), but that 
which was involuntary as 6. g. when one had no 
access to her pale, or when she exacted as a term 
of membership something in faith or practice 
which a Christian could not yield with a good and 
enlightened ccnscience. In this latter case, 
whatever guilt there is belongs to the portion of 
the church which made such a term of communion 
(9 John x.). In such a way Rome is responsible 
for much of the present division in the ecclesias- 
tical world. But we find nothing in our section 
or in other portions of the Scriptures to justify 


that he completely belongs to them, walks among | any increase of this division by a state of volun. 
them, is a Father to each one of them, and will! tary isolation or withdrawal from any established 


<)> 


CHAP. VI. 11-17. VII. 1. 


einen 


branch of the church on account of minor imper- 
fections. ‘‘It only justifieth our withdrawing 
our communion from idolaters, and from noto- 
rious scandalous sinners in such duties and 
actions, or in such degrees, as we are under no 
obligation to have fellowship and communion 
with them in.” Poole’s Annotations]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke:—Ver. 11. We here see the source and 
nature of a true and ready eloquence: a living 
faith and a friendly confidence in those whom we 
address.—Ver. 12. Comp. chap. xii.15. Alas! we 
have many ministers with hearts open and en- 
larged enough to embrace all their hearers, but 
their hearers have hearts which are too generally 
closed and too narrow to admit them and their 
messages (Isa. li. 1; Ps. cix. 4).—Ver. 14. 
Hepineer:—Who can love a society which costs 
him the love of God ?—-Let us have God, our God, 
God in us and with us, and all else may go! 
Little then, O world, do we care for your com- 
pany or your friendship (James iv. 4)!—Ver, 15. 
In Christianity we have the mind and the like- 
ness of Christ; can we think of having these 
along with our carnal lusts? There can be no 
agreement between Christ and Belial, for the 
great object of this unclean spirit is to ruin men, 
bat Christ’s object is to destroy the works of the 
devil and to raise men to heaven.—Ver. 16. God’s 
holy and good spirit, and the spirit of uncleanness 
and wickedness, can never dwell at once in the 
same heart (Matth. vi. 24), No one can be a 
temple of the living God, until the living God 
gives him spiritual life-—Ver. 17. Sins and vices 
of all kinds are impurities in God’s sight, and all 
Curistians, as God’s spiritual priests, should be 
without blemish.—Ver. 18. What can be more 
comforting than to have God for a Father, and 
to be in Christ His beloved sons and daughters? 
Not oaly will such be filled with joy and peace, 
but they will endeavor to walk worthy of their 
high vocation and to be truly devout in all their 
intercourse with God (Gen. xvii. 1).—Chap. vii. 
1. We become pure only as we exercise true re- 
pentance and are renewed day by day; and this 
can be only as we allow the Holy Spirit to accom- 
plish in our hearts without obstruction his proper 
work of purification (John xy. 2), and as we use 
every possible means for putting off old corrup- 
tions (Eph. iv. 22; Gal. v. 24), and to exercise 
ourselves unto godliness (1 Tim. iv. 7; Col. iii. 
10-12).—From the garment of the old man, one 
piece after another has to be gradually taken or 
rather torn off (Spener). The renewed man 
must therefore: 1. Examine himself in every 
way to find what sins most easily beset him, and 
when they are most dangerous; 2. Guard against 
them as much as possible; 3. Observe carefully 
what states of mind usually precede his besetting 
sins, that he may in due time suppress the evil 
desire before it has acquired ascendancy; 4. Re- 
sist every evil passion and overcome it with the 
weapons of faith, prayer, and clear representa- 
tions of his duty and of his baptismal vows; 5. 
Continue to smite the enemy even when he seems 
slain, etc.—The fear of God should make us dili- 
gent in the pursuit of holiness, for we should re- 
member that only thus can we please Him whose 





121 





eye is never off from us.— Hepincer:—The- 
Gospel should make us never inactive but always: 
vigorous and lively toadvance in godliness. The: 
pure and thriving are the only ones who perse- 
vere. And why should any one stand still ?—- 
Are these our thanks for such precious pro-- 
mises? 

BERLENB. BrsLe:—Ve_r. 11. The love of God! 
and of our neighbor, mercy, hope and joy, won- 
derfully enlarge our hearts; and since the Lord,. 
who makes aman His habitation, fills immensity, 
and knows no limits, He must of course expand 
the contracted heart and give it some degree of 
susceptibility.—Ver. 14. Animals of a different 
nature were not allowed to draw inthesame yoke;;: 
and Christians should abstain from all com-- 
panions who will not work in Christ’s yoke. No» 
heart can be at the same time darkened, ensnared 
and polluted by sin, and enlightened, emancipated. 
and purified by Christ. Darkness hates the 
light and flees before it.—Ver. 16. Whoever is. 
not a temple of God must be a temple of idols: 
and of Satan. Surely no one can be a temple of 
God who makes an idol of the world, and seeks. 
his profit, honor and pleasure in the world, To. 
be the Lord’s and to be His sanctuary involves: 
the possession of a divine life and a direct fel- 
lowship with God. God is willing to rest, rule: 
and walk in the heart. Turn to Him with all 
thine heart and thou shalt know what this is by 
experience.—Vy. 17, 18. No self-denial can be: 
acceptable to God, if it is merely external and’ 
not in the heart. And yet by these external acts: 
we give practical evidence to the world. that its; 
own works are evil, and that we have no. com- 
munion with the works of darkness but rather: 
reprove them. The separations which have al- 
ways taken place under the preaching of the 
Gospel have been produced, not from a factious 
spirit on the part of God’s people, not because 
they despised their fellow-men, not because they 
fancied they were better than others, but simply 
because they were anxious to avoid what is. 
wrong. God is willing to dwell in His people, 
and if they would dwell in Him, they must con- 
tinue steadfast and touch no unclean thing. If 
we desire to be children of God, we must com- 
pletely separate ourselves from everything op- 
posed to Him. And yet, unless we intend that the 
world shall have equal power over us, we must. 
cast ourselves wholly upon the help of the al- 
mighty.—Chap. vii. 1. The power by which our 
hearts are renewed is principally derived from. 
God’s own precious promises. These are an 
essential part of God’s.covenant with us, but He: 
demands that we also should heartily observe the 
conditions of the covenant (Jer. vii. 8-10), We: 
are continually assailed. by evil, and yet we are 
required at all times.to be pure.. This .we ought 
to be and have power to be, but not by any 
strength of our own, but by. the aid of our risen: 
Saviour. It is important to be freed not merely 
from gross vices, but from those spiritual 
wickednesses with which the foul spirit some- 
times besmears the soul (covetousness, arro~ 
gance, envy, anger, e/c.); and the more spiritual 
these are the more abominable are they in God’s 
sight, Indeed, unless the work of purification 
extends to the most secret thought (Heb. iv. 12), 
we shall cherish something which will be false, 


122 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


TFT OO eee, 


selfish and impure in His eyes. It is the great 
business of the new life to be continually becom- 
ing pearls of the purest lustre. If we follow as 
God leads us, and as he gives us power to walk; 
if we submit cheerfully to His discipline, we shall 
doubtless reach at least the complete maturity of 
Christ (Eph. iv. 13). 

Riecer:—Venrs. 11ff. No minister should hope 
to win the hearts of men by the esteem and the 
respect which he commands in society, if he does 
not also freely open his heart to them in love. 
—Ver. 14ff. Whatever may be the consequences 
to ourselves, we should never think lightly of the 
separation from a world lying in wickedness and 
the superiority to it which faith in Christ and 
the possession of God’s Spirit gives us. Unless 
we receive in vain the grace of our high calling, 
we shall find connected with it the largest pro- 
mises. Compared with these, what has the world 
to offer?—Chap. vii. 1. Why is it that some times 
it takes a long time to fix and tranquilize our 
hearts, or to become calm after the excitement 
which some arrogant treatment or some offence 
has awakened in our bosom? How much prayer 
has thus been hindered? How many hours, 
which might have been spent in a Divine peace, 
have been spoiled by the torment of our own 
thoughts? All this comes from that filthiness of 
the flesh and spirit which we still allow to re- 
main inus. Sanctification begins by forsaking 
the promiscuous multitude, by drawing near to 
God and by giving ourselves to His service. But 
it must be continued and completed. The fear 
of God is our strong fortress and security; let 
us see to it that we do not presumptuously ven- 
ture away from it! 

Heusner:—Ver. 11. Itis not like a Christian 
to maintain a perpetual reserve toward those 
around him, for by his renewed nature he must 
long to open his heart to those he loves. Be- 
tween friends there must necessarily be a free- 
dom of expression, and one of the benefits of 
those associations into which only a few are ad- 
mitted is, that the heart may be more freely ex- 
posed there.—Ver. 12. The enlarged and full 
heart of a Christian must not unfrequently ex- 
perience much sorrow when it is misunderstood 
and not appreciated by those in whom it confides. 
—Ver. 13. The love which never gives by halves 
demands the whole heart in return.—Vyv. 14, 15. 
Christianity claims that our hearts should be 
shared by nothing else, and that not only the de- 
sires but the whole mind and heart should be pure. 
It calls for the expulsion of all foreign elements 
from our natures, and insists upon an absolute 
intolerance of eyerything inconsistent with its 
principles and the word of God. Distinguish 
here between that disposition to live peaceably 
with others, which springs from benevolence, 
and that which accommodates itself to them, ap- 
proves of their course and imitates their conduct 
from fear. Whoever joins with others in what 
is sinful, from a love of their society, accepts the 
yoke which they received from a love of sin. 
See the diametrical opposition between truth 
and error, goodness and wickedness. Impure 
and weak men would gladly unite these together, 
but Christianity says to them: Either receive the 
good as a whole, or decline it altogether: there 








must be no mingling of them together. Christ 
is determined to be our only Master; He calls 
for the whole heart or none of it. To receive 
the maxims and customs of the unbelieving world 
is the same thing as to pay court to Satan. The 
Christian is always at open war with everything 
not of God, and there must be no temporizing, no 
yielding. Keep thyself pure!—Ver. 16. When 
a man yields up his heart to sin, he sets up an 
idol there. But God can have possession only 
where nothing else is tolerated.—If God dwells 
in us, it is by the continual influence of His 
Spirit producing an inward life which is entirely 
Divine. If God walks among us there will be a 
common form of life in which the mind of the 
Spirit will be clearly expressed, and an impres- 
sion will be made upon others that God is in the 
midst of us. Whoever enters such a community 
wiil feel the animation of a Divine breath, and 
will be moved to spiritual activity.—Ver. 17. 
Though we were born and grew upin the world, 
and though we have caught much of its spirit, 
the moment we forsake it we forsake it entirely, 
and henceforth feel a contempt for everything in 
it, in which God has no part. This is a separa- 
tion of which all must approve. In such a world 
we may be looked upon as exiled from God, but 
in leaving it we find in Him our Father.—Ver. 
18. The whole Christian world ought to be one 
holy, divine family. Oh, how far is it from be- 
ing so now !—Chap. vii. i. The sanctifying power 
of God’s promises (1 Jno. iii. 8). Great promises, 
great demands; great expectations, great warn- 
ings! Every sin is a vile spot upon a Christian, 
whose whole body and soul ought to be a pure 
temple of God. Sanctification begins with con- 
version, but it continues through the whole life. 
God is determined to make something of us, but 
not all at once. To the accomplishment of His 
purpose it is indispensable that we should cherish 
for Him a holy reverence (1 Pet. i. 17). 

W. F. Bessrr:—Ver. 13. Christians have the 
warmest love and regard for us when they ad- 
monish us not to receive the grace of God in 
vain by a careless association with those who de- 
spise religion.—Ver. 14. The yoke in which un- 
believers toil is that of carnal will, carnal reason, 
carnal inclinations; in a word, everything dear 
to the natural heart. But to the believer this is 
aforeign yoke (Matth. xi. 29). Righteousness 
is the Christian’s royal badge (Matth. vi. 33), 
the richest of all his possessions (Matth. vi 21); 
but unrighteousness is the greatest reproach, 
the greatest injury and the greatest guilt of the 
ungodly man, however splendid may be his 
worldly virtues. To be truly righteous is to be 
truly saved, for life and bliss must be where for- 
giveness of sinis. Onthe other hand, to be truly 
unrighteous is to be really lost, for he is con- 
demned already on whom lies the imputation of 
sin. Righteousness must therefore be forever 
separate from unrighteousness, in doctrine as 
well as in practice!—Ver. 15. It would keep us 
from intermingling our thoughts and efforts with 
those of unbelievers if we would think much of 
the mighty chasm which there is between hea- 
ven and hell. Labor not in the same yoke 
with men, unless you would be willing to remain 
with them forever. The very heart of all idola- 


᾿ 


















awe 


CHAP. VII. 2-16. 


try is a disposition to glorify man, and the prime 
article of the unbeliever’s creed is to make a god 
of the creature, and to exalt the flesh to honor. 
~Ver. 16. The temple of the living God is a 
Church of living saints, a spiritual house per- 
vaded by the life of the Triune God, and com- 
posed of living stones (1 Pet. ii. 5). This in- 
scription: ‘‘The Temple of the living God,” 
should call us away from the disorders of an 
idolatry which conceals a real death under the 
appearance of life, and from the discord of a 
heathenism which is cut up into a thousand 
forms of worship, to a Christian unity whose best 
representation is that of a spiritual temple (Eph. 
ii. 21).—Vv. 17, 18. Christians are no longer the 
mere bearers of the Lord’s vessels, as were the 
priests and Levites of an earlier day, but they 
are themselves the Lord’s vessels; their bodies and 
souls belong to Him, and they are sanctified by 
the Holy Spirit as members of the body of Christ. 
Of course, then, it would be unbecoming for such 
vessels to remain in a world lying in wickedness. 
The union of pure and impure doctrine is the 
very worst kind of desecration. Our Father, 
the Lord Almighty, has assured us that we shall 
always possess abundant satisfaction all along 
the way of self-denial and suffering; but he has 
alse wisely provided that we should be pervaded 
by a holy fear of offending Him (1 Pet. i. 17; 
comp. 1 Cor. x. 22).—Chap. vii. 1. Even though 
we have been partially cleansed from sin, the 
grace will not continue with us unless we remain 
united with Christ by a true faith, and separate 
ourselves from sin. The Christian is called con- 
tinually to aim at perfect sanctification, though 
he daily finds that he comes short of it (Phil. iii. 
12). He must, therefore, persevere in this effort 





123 





until he shall reach the rest which God hag 
prepared for them that love Him. That fear of 
God which urges him forward is not one which 
is cast ‘out by love and has torment (1 Jno. iv. 
18), but one which love itself inspires, because if 
dreads the torment of a defiled conscience. 

F. W. Ropertson, on the whole section:—We 
have here—1. The exuberance of the Apostle’s 
affection (ver. 11). He had received a multitude 
of provocations from the Corinthians, and yet his 
love was deep; our heart is enlarged. It was 
partly compassion for them as his children, for 
whom he had suffered; and it was partly from 
a regard to them as immortal beings, who 
should be, and who might become, exceedingly 
eminent. Then he was eloquent, his mouth was 
open to them. He might have shut his lips and 
in dignified pride have refused to plead his cause. 
But he speaks freely, not even cautiously, but 
like a man who has nothing to conceal or to fear. 
2. The recompense he desired. This was, first, 
unworldliness, or separation from the world. In- 
dependent of the impossibility of agreeing in the 
deepest sympathies, and of there being no iden- 
tity of tastes or antipathies, the first ground was 
immorality, unrighteousness, profligacy, and the 
second was irreligion, unbelief. This separate- 
ness, however is not merely outward, but in 
spirit. It was, secondly, Personal purification 
(chap. vii. 1). The ground on which this request 
was made was ‘‘these promises (the indwelling 
of God, his free reception of us, and His Father- 
hood and our sonship, chap. vi. 16, 17, 18); the 
request itself was for personal purity; and the 
means were, the ‘‘fear of God,” realizing the 
promises and perfecting holiness.—Lectt. XLIX. 
and L., abridged]. 


XIII.—STATEMENT AS TO THE EFFECT OF HIS FIRST EPISTLE, A CORDIAL APPEAL 
TO THEM, AND THE COMFORTING REPORT TITUS HAD BROUGHT HIM OF THE 
IMPRESSION PRODUCED BY THAT EPISTLE. 


CuHaprer VII. 2-16. 


Qt Receive us; we have [om. have, ἡδιχήσαμεν] wronged no man, we have [om. have] 


"8. corrupted no man, we have [om. have] defrauded no man. I speak not this to con- 
demn you,' for I have said before, that ye are in our hearts to die and live with you. 

4 Great is my boldness of speech [om. of speech, παῤῥησία] toward you, great is my 
glorying of you: I am filled with [the] comfort, I am exceeding joyful [made exceed- 


5 ingly to abound with the joy] in all our tribulation. 


For, when we were come into 


Macedonia, our flesh had no rest,? but we were troubled on every side [in every way]; 


6 without were fightings, within were fears. 


Nevertheless God, that comforteth those 


7 that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus; And not by his coming only, 
but by the consolation [comfort] wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us 

y you, 
your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind [zeal, ζῆλον] toward me ; so that 


8 I rejoiced the more. 


For though I made you sorry with a [the] letter, I do not 


repent though* I did repent: fort I perceive that the same epistle hath made you 


124 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
ee  '  πΡ ΥΦῸΕ ΘΘ ΞΘ  ΘΕΘΕΘΘΘΘΞΘΘΘ ΘϑΘθ ΙΙ᾿ι .Μ᾿ 


9 sorry, though # were but for a season. Now [I do not regret it: although I did το, 
gret it (for I perceive that that epistle made you sorry though but for a season), yet 
now] I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance : for ye 
were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. 
For godly sorrow worketh® repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the 
sorrow of the world worketh death. For behold this selfsame thing, that ye® sorrowed 
after a godly sort, what carefulness [diligence, σπουδή} it wrought in you, yea, what 
clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement 
desire, [longing, ἐπιπόθησιν] yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge [infliction of punish- 
ment]! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in’ this matter. 
Wherefore, though I wrote unto you, J did it not for his cause that had done the 
wrong, nor for his cause that suffered wrong, but that our care for you [your earnest 
care for us]* in the sight of God might appear unto [with, πρὸς} you. Therefore we 
were comforted in your comfort;? yea, and exceedingly the more joyed we [comforted. 
But in our comfort, we joyed the more exceedingly] for the joy of Titus, because his 
spirit was [has been] refreshed by you all. For if I have boasted any thing to him of 
you, I am not ashamed; [was not made ashamed, οὐ χατησχύνθην] but as wespake all 
things to you in truth, even so our’ boasting which J made [om. which J made] before 
Tirus, is [was, ἐγενήθη} found a truth. And his inward affection is more abundant 
toward you, whilst he remembereth the obedience of you all, how with fear and trem- 
16 bling ye received him. I rejoice therefore [om. therefore]" that I have confidence in 
you in all things. 


10 
11 


12 
13 


14 


1 Ver. 3.—Lachm. instead of οὐ πρὸς κατάκ. λέγω has πρός κατάκρισιν οὐ λέγω with B.C.; but against much stronger 
evidence. [Sinait. has since added its testimony to that of B.C., but even such authority is doubtful against all the ver- 
sions and nearly all the Greek and Latin Fathers. | 

2 Ver. 5.—Lachm. has ἄνεσιν ἔσχεν instead of ἔσχηκεν ἄνεσιν, with pretty strong but not decisive authorities. [The 
Rec. has ἔσχηκεν with C. Ὁ. L. and Sin. with Chrys., Theodt. and Damasc. The perfect (hath had) is u-uch more likely to 
be genuine, as expressive of a continued and not a momentary feeling. The position of ἄνεσιν before ἔσχ. is sustained 
principally by C. F. G. the Ital. and Vulg. Theodt. and the Latin Fathers.] 

8 Ver. 8.—Lachm. has εἰ δὲ καί instead of the second ei καί, with only B. The δέ was interpolated in order to make 
the contrast with the preceding sentence more prominent. 

4 Ver. 8.—A number of MSS. leave οὐ yap, though in opposition to superior authorities. The Vulgate has βλέπων 
Eid quod]. This last was a correction to show that the inference or conclusion commenced with viv χαίρω; and γάρ was 
eft out to show. that the inference commenced with βλέπω. [The Rec. will thus best explain all the variations; all 
agree that a new subject is introduced with εἰ καὶ μετεμελόμην; then δέ was introduced for the sake of contrast and 
connection; then γάρ was left out by some because the apodosis was supposed to commence with βλέπω: and by others 
βλέπων was substituted for BAérw yap, because they thought the apodosis should commence with νῦν χαίρω. Tischen- 
dort (agreeing in sense with the Vulgate and Luther) punctuates as Dr. Kling does in his version, with a colon after μετα- 
κέλομαι. andacomma after ὑμᾶς. The punctuation in our Eng. Vers. makes the sense very tame.] 

δ Ver. 10.—For ἐργάζεται Rec. has κατεργάς. in opposition to the best authorities. It was so made that the word might 
conform to its form in ver. 11. [Karepya¢. does not seem demanded here, as it does at the close of ver. 10, even if the 
simple verb had been used in the first half of that verse]. 

6 Ver. 11—Rec. has ὑμᾶς although opposed by the best MSS. It was evidently inserted to complete what was under- 
stood. [Inserted by D. K. L. and the Greek Fathers, but omitted by B. C. F. Sin. and the Lat. Fathers]. 

7 Ver. 11.—Recep. has ἐν before τῷ πράγματι, but it is thrown out by some of the best MSS. It was probably an ex- 
planatory addition. [It does not appear in B. G Ὁ. (1st Cor.) F. G@. Sin. the Vulg. and Goth. verss., and some of the 
Fathers]. In like manner, in the first part of the verse, ἐν is sometimes put before ὑμῖν, and Lachmann has received it 
though in brackets. [It is omitted by B. D K. L. Sin., with the Copt. and Goth. verss., and Clem., Damasc. and Oecum.] 

8 Ver. 12—Some MSS. have ὑμῶν τ. ὑπ. ὑμῶν, some ἡμῶν--ἡμῶν, and some ἡμῶν---ο-΄ΟΨ-μῶν, The decided preponder- 
ance of testimony, however, is in favor of ὑμῶν---ἡμῶν, which also is to be preferred as the more difficult reading. [Al- 
terations from the original may have taken place either designedly to remove a difficulty, or undesignedly from the 
resemblance in appearance and sound. Onr anthor’s rendering is adopted by Griesbach, Lach., Tisch. and Alford, and 
they are sustained by B. C. Ὁ. (2d and 3d Cor.) Καὶ. L. and many cursives with the Syr., Arm., Copt., Ethiop., Damasc. and 
Oeccum. The Sinait. has in the orig. cod. ὑμῶν--ὁμῶν. B. and Sin. (3d Cor.) also insert ἀλλ᾽ before οὐδὲ. 

9 Ver. 13.—Rec. has παρακεκλήμεθα ἐπί τῇ παρ. ὃ. περισσοτέρως δὲ in opposition to the best MSS. The same may 
be said of ὑμῶν which it has instead of ἡμῶν. The latter was a change on account of the ἐπὶ occurring twice in different 
senses. [Alford: “The δὲ was placed after mepio. apparently to conform to the ἐχαρήμεν ἐπὶ below, by joining mapaxexA. 
ἐπὶ : then also the change of nu. into du. became necessary.” The reading adopted by Lach., Tisch. and Alford is mapa- 
κεκλήμεθα. “Eni δὲ τῇ παρακλ. ἡμ. περισ. μᾶλλον, after B. C. Ὁ. F. K. L. Sin. with the Lat. Syr. and Copt. versions.] 

10 Ver. 14.—Lachm. has ὑμῶν instead of ἡμῶν after καύχησις, but it is feebly sustained. The same is true of tho 
omission of ἡ before ἐπὶ Τίτον, [although it has for itself the important testimony of B. and Sin.] 

11 Ver. 16 —We have sufficient authority for throwing out the οὖν which the Rec. inserts after χαίρω. [It is absent 
tion] every uncial of mucb authority, and from most of the cursives, and it is an evident correction to assist the connec- 
tion]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vens. 2-4.—Receive us.—[In this passage 
we have Paul’s feelings toward his fellow- 
Christians presented with more liveliness than 
in almost any other passage. His restless anxiety 
to possess their love, his solicitude at having 
grieved them, and his delight on being reassured 
of their affection, show the warm friendliness of 


his nature. The same cause makes this one of 
the most rhetorical of allhis writings; as may be 
seen in his repeated anaphore (vers. 2, 4, 11, 
12), the extreme delicacy of many of his allu- 
sions, the overflowing and struggling energy of 
his expressions (vers. 4, 7, 13, 15), his periphras- 
tic designation of God (ver. 6), and the freedom 
(παῤῥησία) with which he runs from one sugges- 
tion to another. See Stanley’s note on Paul’s de- 
light in human intercourse, and freedom from the 


ΡΟΝ 


CHAP. VII. 2-16. 





ascetic spirit, p. 461]. The demand, Receive us, 
is probably a resumption of the idea thrown out 
in the similar demand, be ye also enlarg2d, in 
chap. vi. 13, and in it the Apostle intended to 
call on the Corinthians for their affectionate 
confidence. The original word (γωρήσατε) signi- 
fies, give us room in your hearts; like χωρεῖν τι 
in John ii. 6, and χωρεῖν, so far as it referred to 
personal objects in Mark ii. 2. Others would 
render it: understand us rightly: [Tyndale and 
Cranmer: ‘Understand us”]; comp. χωρεῖν, 
Matth. xix. 11, 12. This certainly could refer to 
nothing in the preceding admonitions, for these 
had contained nothing likely to be misunder- 
stood; but sufficient attention has not been given 
to the possible relation of this passage to the se- 
verity shown in 1 Cor. vy. Nothing but love and 
confidence would be needful to insure their ac- 
ceptance of what he then said and did.—We 
wronged no one, we corrupted no one, 
we defrauded no one (ver. 2).—In these brief 
sentences he presents in an animated style, with- 
out a yap, the reason for thisdemand. Thathe had 
an exclusive reference to the incestuous person, 
is as improbable as it is that he had no such re- 
ference whatever (comp. vers. 8 ff.). Even if 
such a denial of doing injustice, or of having 
corrupted any one, could be made to fit such a 
reference (the former by signifying to inflict in- 
justice through extreme severity (1 Cor. v. 5), 
and the latter by signifying to ruin one, through 
the deliverance of him over to Satan), certainly 
the idea of fraud contained in ἐπλεονεκτήσαμεν 
could not be understood (as Riickert suggests) to 
refer to an improper assumption of spiritual 
powers, and therefore would not admit of such 
an interpretation. It is, however, very likely 
that in the first denial (ἠδικήσαμεν) he had his eye 
principally upon that case, and that he intended 
to repel the imputation of his having violated any 
one’s rights by a needless severity of discipline; 
that in the second (ἐφϑεήραμεν) he had some re- 
ference to the charges made by the Judaizing 
teachers, of his having seduced the people by 
false doctrines, and especially by his doctrine of 
Christian liberty (comp. ὡς πλάνοι, chap. vi. 8; 
also ii. 17; iv. 2 οἱ al.); and finally that when he 
said he took advantage (πλεονεκτεῖν) of no one, 
he was repelling the insinuation noticed after- 
wards in chap. xi. 14, 16ff., with respect to his 
management of the collections and other matters 
(comp. Meyer and Qsiander).—I say not this 
to condemn you (ver. 3a).—Tle here turns 
aside for a moment to notice a possible misap- 
prehension of what he had just said, as if he had 
denied that they had any affection for him, and so 
had utterly condemned and cast them off for their 
ingratitude, their suspicions and their outrageous 
offences against him. It would not have been 
very difficult to give an offensive turn to his em- 
phatic demand that they would receive him into 
their hearts. And yet it would by no means 
come up to the Apostle’s aim if the only con- 
demnation which he wished to deny was supposed 
to be involved in his denial of such a defrauding 
as would be implied in accusing them of covetous- 
ness because they had contributed nothing to his 
support. After κατάκρισιν we must understand 
ὑμῶν (not ἐκείνον, as Riickert suggests with refe- 
rence to the incestuous person).—For I have 











128 





said before that ye are in our hearts to die 
and live with you (ver. 8 /).—The Apostle here 
proceeds to show that he could not have intended 
to condemn them, inasmuch as such a design 
would have been inconsistent with what he had 
said. The place in which he had said what he 
herespeaks of must have been in the present Epis- 
tle (comp, Eph. iii. 8), and especially in chap. vi. 
11. The substance of this he now repeats, 
when he says that they were in his heart (ἐν ταῖς 
καρδίαις ἡμῶν ἐστε); comp. Phil. i. 7, [He uses 
the perfect instead of the aorist, because what he 
had said was still said and remained true up to 
the time of speaking]. The sincerity of the af- 
fection and fellowship here professed he further 
shows by adding: to die and to live with us 
εἰς τὸ συναποϑανεῖν καὶ συζῇν). The subject of 
this infinitive sentence must be supplied. It 
must be either μὲ, in which case, he intended to 
say: so that I would desire to die and live with 
you (though we could not then understand why 
συναπ. is placed before συζῆν); or ὑμᾶς, in which 
case he intended to say: in order that ye may 
die and live with us. The ἐστέ of the previous 
sentence is in favor of the latter, but we must re- 
member that he is not here speaking of their 
sympathy with him in his extreme perils, his de- 
liverances and his welfare. The main proposi- 
tion had reference to the love which he had to- 
ward them, not to that which they had toward 
him. The expression refers either to the insepa- 
rable fellowship which he felt with respect to 
them (subjectively) in his own heart, in conse- 
quence of which they would never be absent from 
his heart, whatever might be his lot, whether to 
live or to die (just as we bear within our hearts 
those whom we love in life or in death) (Meyer), 
or (objectively), to such an intimate connection 
with him, that their life and death would be ne- 
cessarily involved in his, 7. 6., that they would 
share in his death and his life, and in all his 
sufferings for Christ and his deliverances from 
them (possibly also in his eternal blessedness). 
Comp. i. 7. With this latter interpretation, the 
idea would be that the love which made him bear 
them on his heart would make every thing com- 
mon between him and them, and hence that they 
would be brought into complete fellowship with 
him in life or in death. [Meyer: How natural 
it was for Paul, in continual danger of dying, to 
put the συναπ. emphatically before the συζῆν. 
There is therefore no necessity of supposing that 
συζῆν must refer to the future life because it 
comes after ovvar. Paul may or may not have 
known of the ‘“‘sacred band” who had agreed to 
live and die with each other, or of Roman pro- 
verbs of a like nature with what he here says; 
but he was doubtless uttering simply the extreme 
devotion of every good shepherd to the welfare 
of his flock (John x. 11). Grotius: ‘ egregius 
χαρακτὴρ boni pastoris]. The εἰς would imply 
that such would be the object he would have in 
view, and not merely that such would be the re- 
sult. This explanation probably deserves the 
preference, not only to the former, but also to 
another, which makes σὺν imply a reciprocity οἵ 
fellowship, and thus combines the subjective and 
the objective interpretation together.—Great is 
my boldness toward you, great is my 
glorying of you (ver. 4). In this verse tLe 


126 





Apostle goes on to show that his disposition and 
conduct toward them were such that there ought 
to be no such misconstruction of his language. 
Παῤῥησία here signifies not liberty or plainness 
of speech (Luther [the English version] et al.), 
but inward confidence [Vulgate: mihi, jiducia est 
apud vos] (Epa. iii. 12; 1 John ii. 28; iii. 21; 
iv. 17; v.14; comp. Bleek on Heb. iii. 6). The 
outward expression of this inward disposition 
was the καύχησις. Neanper: ‘‘When Paul was 
with others he boasted much of the ample and 
thorough results which the grace of God had 
produced among them.” To regard (with Osi- 
ander) this boasting as something entirely within 
the Apostle’s own heart is not indispensable to 
the symmetry of the discourse, nor accordant 
with the Apostle’s usual style. It was more 
probably the exulting way in which the corfi- 
dent spirit of Paul usually expressed itself when 
his heart was elevated. The object of this boast- 
ing was the Corinthians themselves (comp. ver. 
14; ix. 2), the results of his labors among them, 
and their subsequent spiritual progress. We 
may remark here a climax with reference to the 
preceding clause. So with respect to the follow- 
ing sentences—I am filled with comfort, I 
am exceeding joyful in all our tribula- 
tions (ver. 4 b).—we have παράκλησις--- χαρὰ, 
πεπλήρωμαι---ὑπερπερισσεύομαι. [HonaE: ‘So far 
from having any disposition to upbraid or to re- 
criminate, his heart was overflowing with differ- 
ent feelings. He had not only confidence in them, 
he was proud of them; he was not only comforted, 
he was filled with exceeding joy.” Instead of the 
third member of the anaphora, the Apostle has, 
by way of a stronger and climactic expression, 
πεπλήρωμαι]. Πεπλήρωμαι here, as also in Rom. 
j. 29, and sometimes in the classic writers, is 
used with the dative. Ὑπερπερισσεύομαι signi- 
fies: I am made rich, overflowing with, etc. 
Tlepiocetew is used transitively also in chap. iv. 
15; ix. 8, and passively in Matth. xiii. 12, The 
article implies that the Corinthians were the 
source of both emotions (asin ver. 7): the special 
consolation which is from you and the joy which 
is in you (Osiander); or it indicates the particu- 
lar consolation and joy which he needed (Meyer). 
The ἐπὶ here signifies, not as in chap. i. 4, con- 
cerning (so as to express the relation or object 
of χαρά), but in, in the midst (simultaneously), and 
it expresses the relation of both the preceding 
clauses. The frequent change of the singular 
to the plural, and of the plural to the singular in 
this section, shows that the Apostle’s own feel- 
ings were predominant in all that he was saying 
of himself in common with his fellow-laborers. 
In this verse the change was to indicate that 
e bore the suffering in common with them, 
but that the yoy was wholly a matter of his own 
experience. Alford also notices that ‘the pre- 
sent tense indicates the abiding of the effect ”’]. 
Vers. 5-7. For even as we went into 
Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we 
were troubled in every way. (ver. 5).—The 
Apostle now enters into some details; and, in the 
first place, with respect to the tribulation. Kai 
has reference to what he had said in chap, ii. 12f, 
Ife had there informed them that on his arrival at 
Troas he could not rest, but that he had gone 
immediately to Macedonia, He now adds that 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 











even when he came to Macedonia he was unable, 
to find rest. “Eoyyxev is here the same as in 
chap. ii. 12, and its accordance with the verb in 
that passage suggests the suspicion that ἔσχεν 
may have been the original reading. The rea- 
son that our flesh (ἡ σάρξ ἡμῶν) is substituted for 
my spirit (τῷ πνεύματί μου) asin chap. ii. 12, may 
be found in the difference of circumstances on 
the two occasions. At Troas the unrest had its 
source and seat within, and consisted of anxious 
thoughts, δέοι; but in Macedonia it was one which 
affected the flesh. And yet we must not suppose 
it exactly confined to the body (as Riickert sup- 
poses, 6. g., a sickness), nor that it means his 
whole person, and so the same as we; but it 
means the whole natural life in its infirmities, its 
susceptibilities and its sensibility to suffering; 
in a word, the whole sensuous nature, internal 
and external (comp. Matth. xxvi. 41), every 
thing which can be influenced not only by the 
conflicts of the world around him, but by those 
cares and temptations of the inward spirit of 
which he was about to speak. In positive con- 
trast with this he now says we were troubled in 
every way (ἀλλ᾽ ἐν παντὶ ϑλιβόμενοι). He uses 
the participle, as if he had written οὐκ ἤμεϑα 
ἄνεσιν ἔχοντες TH σαρκί (comp. Meyer). What he 
means by ἐν παντί (in every condition, in all pos- 
sible circumstances) is more fully developed 
when he says,—without were fightings, and 
within were fears. (ἔξωθεν μάχαι, ἔσωθεν φόβοι). 
The latter phrase is more forcible without ἦσαν). 
Ἔξωϑεν and ἔσωϑεν have reference not to those 
who were Christians (weak brethren and errone- 
ous teachers), and those who were not; but in 
the one case to those opponents with whom he 
came in conflict, whether in the Church or out 
of it, and in the other to various difficulties with~ 
in the Christian community, some of which, es- 
pecially those which pertained to the Corinthian 
Church, occasionally became quite formidable. 
[It seems more natural to understand these par- 
ticles with reference to the Apostle himself, since 
he was narrating his personal restlessness and 
troubles]. — Nevertheless He who com- 
forteth the downcast, comforted us. 
even God comforted us, by the coming of 
Titus—(ver. 6). Having considered the trou- 
ble to which he had been subjected, he now turns 
to notice the Divine consolation he had received 
under it. This had been sufficient to allay the 
storm in his soul. He mentions God in this 
connection [not at first under any of the ordi- 
nary names of the Deity, for at the moment he 
was so full of this peculiar aspect of God, that. 
he deems it sufficient to designate him] as the 
One whose peculiar office it is to comfort them 
who are cast down (ὁ παρακαλῶν τοὺς ταπεινούς, 
comp. chap. i. 3). [The present indicates that 
this is what is always taking place. In classical 
and Hellenistic usage ταπεινοί means not only 
those who are humble, but those who are hum- 
‘pled, stricken down; and it refers not merely to 
the outer condition, but to the feelings of the 
heart, the disposition, and probably to both 
united (cast down). In the present case it should 
probably be taken in the most extensive sense. 
In the conclusion of this part of the sentence God 
must be regarded as especially emphatio. Ἔν 
signifies, as usual, im, the sphere in which the 





CHAP. VII. 2-16. 


127 





comfort took place, but it also means in conse- 
quence of. The arrival of Titus was the reason 
for his consolation. With great delicacy he 
speaks of himself as bowed down on account of 
the misconstruction of his brethren, and as if 
nothing could relieve his mind but the personal 
return of his beloved associate. He intimates 
also that one essential element in the comfort he 
experienced, sprung from the delightful frame 
of mind which Titus exhibited on their account. 
—And not by His coming only, but also 
by the comfort wherewith He was com- 
forted concerning you (ver. 7 a).—E7i has 
here, as in 1 Thess. iii. 7, the sense of: on ac- 
count of, in relation to. We conclude, therefore, 
that Titus also had been much disturbed and 
anxious on account of the state of things at Co- 
rinth, and that he had been reassured by what 
he had seen during his visit there. The close 
connection between the participial sentence and 
παρεκλήϑη, suggests that the Apostle was here 
speaking of the tranquilizing effect which the 
visit at Corinth had had upon Titus’ own mind. 
This was so perceptible, that during the recital 
of what Titus had witnessed, the load of care 
was removed also from the heart of the Apostle 
himself. Of course this implies that Titus had 
previously had all his anxieties allayed by what 
he had seen of the disposition of the Corinthian 
Church. (Osiander thinks that the Apostle in 
the tumult of his joy had completely amalga- 
mated into a single thought the consolation of 
Titus, his own perception of that consolation, 
and the account of the whole which he was then 
writing). [It is implied that Titus was com- 
forted while he was reciting the storv in the ears 
of Paul himself, for the participle avayy. is given 
to explain how Titus was comforted. The Apos- 
tle was comforted while hearing, and Titus while 
telling such news]. The comforting things 
which Titus announced respecting the Corinthi- 
ans, are given in the succeeding sentence,— 
when he told us your longing, your 
mourning, your zeal respecting me, so 
that I rejoiced the more. (ver. 7 4).—This im- 
plies: 1, their longing to see the Apostle once 
more, increased, as it doubtless was, by his delay 
in coming to them; 2, their ὀδυρμός, ἱ. 6., the ex- 
treme sorrow which they had expressed in bitter 
lamentations, when they became aware of the 
anxiety their sad state had caused him, and 
when they had received the severe reproof con- 
tained in his first Epistle; 3, their zeal in behalf 
of the Apostle, the interest awakened in the 
Church (as a whole, though not without some 
important exceptions), in behalf of his person 
and his authority (others say: affectionate zeal 
to repair the injury they had done him, to allay 
all his apprehensions, and to give him joy by 
their amendment). The phrase ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ (your 
zeal for, or in behalf of me), is so essentially 
and immediately connected with ζῆλον, that it 
seemed needless to repeat the article in order to 
define it more perfectly. The power of the im- 
pression made upon him by the account is shown 
in the sentence: ὥστε μὲ μᾶλλον χαρῆναι. If we 
regard μᾶλλον here as equivalent to: potius, we 
must place the emphasis upon χαρῆναι, and the 
sense then would be: ‘so that instead of being 
troubled, I rather rejoiced,’ But from the order 








| 





of the words we are induced to place the em- 
phasis rather upon μᾶλλον, or at least upon 
παρεκάλεσεν, Which, indeed, contains essentially 
the idea of joy, and may be regarded as the ο]1- 
max of this joy [so that the sense would be, so 
that I rejoiced or was comforted more than be- 
fore]. Others suggest in addition that the in- 
creased joy was in consequence of the arrival 
of Titus [Ὁ e., my usual joy was much increased]. 
Such a meaning would be much the same in its 
essential result. [In the old Oxford Paraphrase, 
the expression here is: so that I rejoiced now 
the more exceedingly from the occasion of my 
former grief. Curysostom: ‘On these (before 
mentioned) he abounds in joy, and was filled 
with consolation, because he had made them feel. 
These things seem to me to be said, not only to 
soften what has gone before, but to encourage 
those whq had acted well. For although we 
doubt not that some among the Corinthians were 
obnoxious to his former accusations, and un- 
worthy of these praises, he did not wish to dis- 
tinguish them, but makes both the praises and 
the accusations common, leaving it to the con- 
sciences of his hearers, to select what respec- 
tively belonged to them.’’] 

Vers. 8-11. Because even though I made 
you sorry in the Epistle, I donotregret it: 
although I did regret it (for I perceive 
that that Epistle made you sorry, though 


‘but for a season), yet now I rejoice.— 


{The word ὅτε compels us to treat this sentence 
as a reason for the rejoicing of which he had 
just spoken. The phrase εἰ καὶ occurs three times 
in this single verse, and in each instance admits 
a fact without encouraging a doubt respecting it : 
‘IT admit I made you sorry, that I regretted it, 
and that the sorrow was but for a season.’ And 
yet it is implied that notwithstanding those facts, 
there were qualifying circumstances: ‘ Even 
though such things were true, he did not then 
regret the sorrow, etc.’] The painful impres- 
sion his former Epistle had produced, did not 
prevent his present rejoicing. He refers, when 
he speaks of making them sorrowful, to the effect 
of the severe reproofs he had administered in 
his first Epistle, especially in the fifth chapter. 
[And yet many cannot discover anything in the 
first Epistle answering to such representations. 
The severity there refers mainly to a private 
wrong of an individual. They think, therefore, 
that an Epistle which had been so severe that 
the Apostle shrinks from reminding the Corin- 
thians that it was his own (τῇ ἐπιστολῇ), must 
have been a brief and lost one which was con- 
fined to public censures, see Introd., @ 6.]. 
There is some dispute regarding the way in 
which the following sentences should be taken. 
If we adopt the reading, εἰ καὶ μετεμελόμην (with- 
out the δὲ, which is contained only in Cod. B.), 
two different constructions are possible. In the 
first place, we may connect this expression with 
what precedes, as if he had intended to say: ‘I 
do not regret it, though I did regret it ;’ in which 
case βλέπω yap, ὅτι ἐλύπησα ὑμᾶς is simply a prac- 
tical confirmation of the preceding ἐλύπησα: “1 
see, from what Titus has told me, that the Epistle 
made you sorrowful, though only for a season; 
or we may regard it as giving the reason for his 
regretting that he had written (μετεμελόμην). 


28 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


.-.--ὄσ τ: ιτΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠοορΠρΠὅὃὀ Τἕἔρρ’ το Ὲ 0ὍΝΟὝὀ06ς.-.-.---.-.--  ΤὙΓΥΓΤςρρτττττττοττττττ τ τττ τ τ τ τ -------͵͵ο΄΄΄΄ῆ΄ῆρ΄6ὖ-ὖ6Φ6π.ϑ. ρ΄ 


When he says: although for a brief season, he in- 
forms them of a circumstance which had dimin- 
ished his regrets, and he probably implies also 


that his own regret had been only a transient | 


feeling (and yet it is in the imperfect). Meyer, 
however, correctly remarks that βλέπω γάρ, ete., 
could not be construed as the reason for any but 
the ov μετεμελόμην of the preceding clause (with 
which, however, on this construction it could 
have no suitable meaning [for why should he 
give what he now sees as a reason for his former 
regrets ])? 





In the second place, we may com- | 


recollected the effects which that Epistle had 
produced without joyful emotions. [The word 
βλέπω is more expressive than ὁρῶ. It refers to 
the mental contemplation which his paternal 
spirit had of them while he was absent from the 
scene. ‘The abruptand disconnected form which 
the Apostle’s language here assumes gives us 8 
vivid picture of the inner workings of his heart. 
Wordsworth remarks: ‘that the language is 
beyond the rigid rules of ordinary grammar, 
and belongs to a higher science, the grammar of 
nature and even of inspiration; and impart an 


mence a new sentence with e καὶ μετεμελόμην, as | indescribable grace of tenderness and truth to 
we may also, and even must do, if we accept of | these impassioned outpourings of his full heart. 


the reading εἰ dé καὶ. 
γάρ after βλέπω, find in the clause beginning 
with βλέπω the apodosis of the whole sentence 
beginning with εἰ καὶ μεταμ. : g. d. ** though I did 
regret it, [now perceive that the Epistle made 
you sorry only for a season.” Even this con- 
struction gives no better specimen of reasoning 
than the other. It remains that we should make 
the clause commencing with viv yaipw (ver. 9) 
the apodosis of the whole sentence in which εἰ 
kde μεταμ., ete., is the protasis. [The Vulgate 
renders it: Quoniam etsi contristavi vos in epis- 
lola, non me poenitet: et si peeniteret, videns quod 
epistola illa, etsi ad horam, vos contristavit, Nunc 
gaudeo, etc. This is translated by the Rhemish, 
‘*« For, although I made you sorry in an Epistle, 
it repenteth me not: albeit it repented me, see- 
ing that the same Epistle (although but for a 
time) did make yousorry. NowIam glad,” etc. ] 
If we adopt the reading which the Vulgate must 
have used [7. ¢., βλέπω γὰρ, the participial sen- 
tence will very conveniently connect with, and 
form a part of, the protasis, to which the apo- 
dosis is, ‘now I rejoice.” The reading βλέπω yao 
is, however, so well established that we are com- 
pelled to receive it into our text. We may then 
regard the sentence commencing with these words 
as a logical parenthesis, thus: ‘Though I did 
at one time regret it—(and not without reason) 
for I perceive (from the account of youby Titus) 
that that Epistle made you sorry—now I rejoice” 
(Meyer.) The regret of which he spoke had 
been experienced some time before that in which 
his feelings changed and he became joyful. On 
this construction, we are struck with the diffi- 
culty, that the Apostle used the present βλέπω, 
rather than the past ἔβλεπον to correspond with 
μεταμελόμην; but the reason probably is that 
what the Apostle perceived on a former occasion 
continued still before his mind, and the peculiar 
nature of the parenthesis had introduced some 
confusion into the strict logical connection. The 
actual course of thought was probably something 
like the following: From the first account 
brought by Titus he had perceived that the Cor- 
inthians were much troubled by the contents of 
this first Epistle, and fora while he had been 
sorry that he had reproved them so severely. 
But when Titus had brought further information 
{on a second return from Corinth] he perceived 
not only that the disturbance had been essentially 
only temporary (πρὸς ὥραν, Gal. ii. 5, for a sea- 
son), but that it soon gave way to a feeling of 
joy, and was productive of many important bene- 
fits. Their sorrow was therefore so far from 
being a sonrce of regret to him, that he never 











Those also who leave out | If they so touch the soul when read now, what 


must have been their effect when they sounded 
forth in all their original freshness, with the 
living voice, in the public recitations of these 
Epistles in the churches of Corinth and Achaia.” 
It is not implied that the Apostle’s regret in- 
volved any moral self-reproach. Dr. Campbell 
says it denotes simply ‘‘ that uneasiness which a 
good man feels, not from the consciousness of 
having done wrong, but from a tenderness for 
others, and a fear lest that which, prompted by 
duty he had said, should have too strong an 
effect upon them.’’] Accordingly the hesitation 
which some writers have felt in admitting that 
an inspired writer would be the subject of such 
regrets, springs from a mistake with regard to 
the human element in inspiration, 7. 6., the va- 
riable disposition of the inspired person. As the 
nobler human feelings are still supposed to be 
in exercise, notwithstanding the essential divin- 
ity of the power which moves them, there is no 
call for those arbitrary attempts, which some 
have made to interpret our passage (com. Meyer 
and Osiander). From what we have already 
said, it is evident that νῦν in ver. 9, should be 
taken in a temporal and not in a logical sense. 
Wot because ye were made sorry, but be- 
cause ye were made sorry unto repent- 
ance. (ver. 96). In οὐχ ὅτι ἐλυπήϑῃτε: (not be- 
cause ye were, efc.) his design was to prevent the 
misconstruction which might be put upon what 
he had said, as if it were a pleasure to him to 
remember that he had given them pain, (cold se- 
verity, com. Lam. iii, 33). The matter which 
gave occasion to his joy was that they had been 
troubled in such a way as to produce a change of 
their feelings, especially with respect to the sad 
case mentioned in the former Epistle (1st Cor. v.). 
The result of such a change was that they had 
made a great advance in Christian morality and 


seriousness, and that they had been deeply hum- 


bled. He proceeds to speak still further on this 
point whenheadds: For ye were made sor- 
ry according to God, that ye might re. 
ceive damage from usin norespect (Ver. 9c), 
In accordance with Paul’s usage κατὰ ϑεόν must 
be designed to direct our minds to the efficient 
author of the sorrow. (Deo efficiente.) It 
means: according to God, ἡ, ¢, according to 
the mind or will of God. Thus in Rom. viii. 27. 
BenGeL says: “ΤῊ sorrow of penitents renders 
their minds conformable to God,” and “κατά sig- 
nifies the feeling of the mind which has regard 
to and follows after God.” Such a one ‘is 
grieved because he has done what God abhors.” 
(AmBrosius). να is here expressive of the 


CHAP. VII. 2-16. 


128 





divine intention, with respect to their sorrow 
according to God; and it implies, even if it had 
not been implied in κατὰ θεόν, that God had had 
a hand in producing their sorrow. The object 
God had in view was, that they might in no way 
suffer injury from their teachers, not even by 
their sorrow. Nranper: ‘It is agreeable to 
the theological view every where predominant in 
Paul’s writings to say that what he had written 
with an upright intention should not result in in- 
jury tothem.” OsIANDER: ἐν μηδενί has the sense 
of, in no part, 7. e., neither in your joyful con- 
fidence nor in the purity of the Church.” But 
is such a meaning quite appropriate or consistent 
with the context? Zyuovota: occurs in 1 Cor. 
lii. 15, in the sense of, he shall suffer loss, The 
preposition ἐκ shows the source of the injury 
which is denied (Chap. ii. 2). He does not mean 
that they would thus be saved from punishment. 
He merely implies that they might have been in- 
jured if they had experienced no change of mind, 
especially if their feelings had become alienated 
from him and embittered toward him. On the con- 
trary he rejoiced to find that the result had been 
salutary.—This idea is further carried out in ver. 
10, where a reason is assigned for what had been 
saidin the preceding finalsentence: ‘*Yehave been 
troubled by God that ye might receive injury from 
us in nothing.—For the sorrow which is ac- 
cording to God worketh out repentance 
unto salvation not to be repented of, (ver. 
10 a),—i. e., a change of heart which leads to sal- 
vation.”” The apostle here refers back to εἴς μετά- 
vo.a, (unto repentance) in ver. 9, and he describes 
this as the effect of a right kind of sorrow. When 
aman is conformed to the mind of God, or is 
troubled by a regard to God on account of his sins, 
he will turn from those sins with all his heart; and 
he will become totally opposed to all that once was 
pleasant or seemed indifferent to him (μετάνοια). 
But this change of heart which was the result of 
the sorrow spoken of, and which in the actual 
experience of believers always included faith, 
was especially the fruit of the sorrow according 
to God and conducted to salvation.* If we con- 


(*In this passage (vss. 8-10), the words μετανοέω and 
μεταμέλομαι are translated indiscriminately by the English 
word: repent. The ijatitude with which this English word 
is popularly used may perhaps warrant this, and yet sucha 
fact only shows how inadequate the word is to express the 
particular meaning of at least one of these Greek verbs. 
The more precise meaning which Theology has assigned to 
the term Repentance, is certainly not quite suitable to either 
ofthem. Divines have attempted to show that the original 
words were uniformly distinguishable in sense, and yet pas- 
sages from the Bible have been quoted to show that each of 
them has sometimes borne every meaning which has been 
given to the other. It must however be conceded that the 
predominant usage of each word arose naturally out of its 
original meaning, and differs very essentially from that of 
the other. Bengel, (on 2 Cor. vii. 10), Bishop J. Taylor, (on 
Repent. Chap. ii. 3 1), Campbell, (Diss. VI. part 117. ἢ 9), 
Archbp. Trench, (Synn. Ser. 2 p. 90 ff), and Webster, (Synn. 
p. 221 f.), have described this meaning and difference with 
the greatest care. Both words have reference to a know- 
ledge or feeling after (μετά) the event. Μεταμέλομαι 18 from 
the simple μέλω : to be an object of care; μετανοέω from the 
simple νοέω to see, to think. There was from the first a 
gradual change in the meaning of both words; the latter 
signifying first, after knowledge, then a change of views, 
then regret, and finally a complete change of the whole 
mind. Often it was used irrespective of all moral feeling, 
but when it came into New Testament language, it gradu- 
ally came to mean a change to a better mind. The noun 
(μετάνοια) occurs there some five and twenty, and the verb 
(μετανοέειν) some five and thirty times. The noun (μεταμέ- 
λεια) does not occur in the N.T., the vero, (μεταμέλομαι) 


9 





nect ἀμεταμέλητον with σωτηρίαν, the idea will be 
that when a man is delivered from his sinful cor- 
ruption he thereby attains everlasting life and 
must of course be forever satisfied. It would be 
absurd to suppose that such a one would ever 
regret his course or have the slightest wish that 
he had never come into this state or into the way 
which leads to it. It must be conceded therefore 
that this epithet is quite suitable to σωτηρίαν, and 
the order of the words favors such an applica- 
tion. But Luther and others connect it with 
μετάνοιαν, and penitentiam non peenitendam is an 
expression which makes good sense. [Calvin also 
with fine critical discernment remarks: The play 
here upon the word penitence, when he says not 
to be repented of, is elegant, for however unplea- 
sant at first taste a thing may be, it renders itself 
desirable by its usefulness. For though the epi- 
thet (ἀμεταμέλ.) may refer as much to the salva- 
tion as to the penitence, it appears to me to agree 
better with the latter word: g. d.: We are taught 
by the very event that no sorrow ought to be 
grievous or troublesome to us; so that though 
repentance have something bitter in it of itself, 
it is described as not to be repented of because 
of the sweet and precious fruit which it pro. 
duces.” The Vulgate renders the phrase thus: 
penitentiam in salutem stabilem operatur, which the 
Rhemish translates: worketh penance unto sal- 
vation that is stable. This use of ἀμεταμέλητος 
in the sense of unchangeable is perhaps sanctioned 
by its use in Rom. xi. 29. It is commonly sup- 
posed that our English Version favors the refer- 
ence of the word to repentance. This however 
does not seem quite clear.] It is true we should 
more naturally have expected that ἀμετανόητον 
would have been used in application to μετάνοιαν, 
but ἀμεταμέλητος brings out better that part of 
the sorrow which is painful, and no one can justly 
say that it creates any halting or feebleness in 
the course of thought. We may therefore, with 
Osiander give the preference to such a connec- 
tion. There is an evident reference to the οὐ 
μεταμέλομαι in ver. 8. As this epistle had drawn 
forth their sorrow and this had produced a change 
of heart which could never be regretted, it had 





only five times; once for the beginning of a trud repentance 
(Matt. xxi. 29), once of the Jews who “did not repent” 
(Matt. xxi. 82) once of Judas (Matt. xxvii. 3), twice (once 
also as a verbal adjective) in our passage, and once of God 
(Heb. vii. 21). Μετάνοια then evidently signifies what Cole- 
ridge expressively calls, “transmentation” in a good sense, 
t.e., to come to a right understanding, conversion so far as 
it relates to the mind: whereas, μεταμέλεια is simply : after 
care, in a good or indifferent sense, sorrowful retrospections, 
and leading to a good or bad result. OSIANDER: “perdued. 
has reference simply to a change of care or effort, μετάν. to 
a change of the whole mind and course of thought; that con- 
cerns an individual thing, this everything; that refers prin- 
cipally to the feelings and is therefore usually translated 
sorrow, while this is the fruit of a true sorrow, and hence 
(as what is perfect embraces the whole) is also frequently 
used to designate the whole process,of repentance. The 
moral nature and worth of repentance is represented in 
μετάν. inasmuch as it includes a change of the entire mind, 
and hence Valla with many others much prefer the Greek 
to the Latin word penitentia, (and the Germ. Busse). In the 
N. T., μετάν. is sometimes and μετάμελ. is never, employed 
to designate this entire change.” Paul’s λύπη when it was 
κατὰ θεὸν worked out a μετάνοια which was ἀμεταμέλητον, 
i.e. the sorrow which was according to God would work 
out in the soul a mental revolution, which could never give 
rise to unhappy regiets; on the other hand, the λύπη which 
was τοῦ κόσμου Would at some period of existence work out 
a μεταμέλεια, ἃ painful regret which will continue to eters 
nity, and be in itself a θάνατον μεταμέλητον.] 


290 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. . 


eee 


been followed by such fruits and had led to sal- 
vation (σωτηρία), he could of course have no re- 
grets on account of the effect of his epistle, and he 
could only rejoice in the recollection of it.—But 
the sorrow of the world worketh death. 
(ver. 104).--He here brings up asan illustration of 
what he had said, a striking contrast. To the di- 
vine sorrow of which he had spoken he now op- 
poses the sorrow of the world, ὁ, 6., the sorrow 
which the ungodly multitude sometimes experi- 
ence. As THoMAs says: ‘‘as is the love so is the 
sorrow.” Tov κόσμου is the genitive, not of the ob- 
ject, i. e., asorrow on account of worldly things or 
possessions, but of the subject, and it must be in- 
terpreted with reference to the contrast. It here 
signifies such a trouble about the apostle’s re- 
proofs as would have produced no change of 
mind, but rather an irritability and a depression 
of spirit on account of wounded pride. As this 
could only harden the heart, it would lead to the 
death which was equivalent to perdition, and of 
course the reverse of salvation. Death is here 
not merely moral corruption, nor a fretting of 
one’s self to death, and above all not a mortal 
sickness or suicide. Comp. Elwert. Stud. der 
Wiirt. Geistl. IX. 1 135ff.—For behold this 
very thing, that ye were made sorry ac- 
cording to God, what great diligence it 
wrought in you (ver. 11).—The apostle here 
points out the way in which the good results of 
the sorrow had been exhibited among the Corin- 
thians themselves. He shows by actual facts the 
proof (introduced by γάρ) of what he had been 
saying. Behold! (idot) is here the utterance of 
a lively emotion. (Osiander). Τοῦτο indicates in 
advance and in a very emphatic manner, the 
matter on which he is about to speak, and the 
particulars of which he immediately proceeds to 
specify; and by αὐτό he designed to say that it 
was that precise thing, and that alone which had 
had such an influence. The simple dative ὑμῖν 
(in you) is more forcible than ἐν ὑμῖν would have 
been, and it must here be regarded as the Dative 
of relation, but closely approximating the dat. 
commodi. The substantive σπουδή signifies ori- 
ginally haste, then diligence, activity, and it is 
here applied to the case of discipline then in hand, 
in contrast with the previous inactivity (STaARKE: 
diligence in recognizing your defects, in comply- 
ing with my exhortations, in removing offences, 
and in making up for past neglects).—Yea, 
clearing of yourselves; yea, indignation; 
The ἀλλά which is so many times repeated and 
with so much emphasis (comp. 1 Cor. vi. 11), is 
not only climactic, but corrective ; equivalent to: 
yea, rather. He intended to say that σπουδῇ was 
perhaps too feeble a word to express the change 
which took place in their minds in consequence 
of their godly sorrow. ᾿Απολογία here means, not 
their defence of the Apostle against his opponents, 
but in accordance with the context, their own 
justification before Titus and so before the Apos- 
tle. It signifies their answer to the charge of 
having apparently given countenance to sin, and 
their sovemn disavowal of all fellowship with 
crime. It was not, however, their practical jus- 
tification of themselves by the actual punish- 
ment of the offender, for this would have antici- 
pated the idea expressed afterwards by ἐκδίκησις. 
The ἀγανάκτησις (indignation) was more than the 


ἀπολογία; for it implies that they were indignant 
that such a thing should have taken place among 
them, and perhaps at themselves that they had 
so long tolerated it and had been so careless of 
the honor of the church.—yea, fear; yea, 
longing desire.—The φόβος was in this case a 
fear not of Divine judgment and still less of 
apostasy, but of the Apostle lest he should come 
to them with a rod (1 Cor. iv. 21). (Heubner 
thinks incorrectly that it was an apprehension 
that new offences might arise, and hence that it 
signifies an increased watchfulness and jealousy 
of themselves). To this reference of the fear of 
the Apostle corresponds the succeeding word, in 
which he passes suddenly to the very opposite ; 
for ἐπιπόϑησις signifies not a joyful longing for 
their own improvement, but as in ver. 7, an 
earnest desire to see the Apostle himself, whose 
love for them they felt even while he reproved 
them so severely, but to whom they turned with 
confidence as soon as they had removed the of- 
fence.—yea, zeal; yea, infliction of punish- 
ment.—If (with Bengel and Meyer) we divide 
the series of six things here mentioned into 
three pairs, in which ἀπολογία and ἀγανάκτησις 
relate to the Corinthians themselves; [φόβος and 
ἐπιπόϑησις to Paul], and ζῆλος and ἐκδίκησις to 
the offender, we must regard ζῆλος as signifying 
something different from what it means in ver. 
7. It must signify in such a case a zeal to punish 
the offender, which attains its end in the éxdixy- 
σις, but which is essentially a zeal in behalf of 
God, the Apostle’s authority, and the chureb’s 
reputation. Bengel makes both of these refer to 
the incestuous person, and with a rather excessive 
refinement he explains ζῆλός as pro bono anime 
ejus, and ἐκδίκησις as contra malum ejus, ᾿Ἐκδίκησις 
is the infliction of punishment in consequence 
of which the law (in this-case the Divine) is ear- 
ried out, maintained and satisfied in its demands 
upon the holiness of God’s people. (The attempt 
to find in this place the Romish doctrine of satis- 
faction is purely arbitrary). If (with Osiander) 
we regard the members in the several pairs as 
contrasted with one another and rising in each 
case towards a-climax, ζῆλος would be zeal for 
the Lord, etc., that the Divine law might be 
maintained through the ἐκδίκησις, 2. e., the punish- 
ment of the guilty one. [DoppripGEe: “Some 
divines have taken it for granted that this verse 
contains seven distinct marks of true repentance, 
to be found in every sincere penitent, whereas 
these are not the characters of the temper of 
each, but of different persons in different cir- 
cumstances, according to the part they respec- 
tively acted in the affair in question.”] The 
result of all this was—In every respect ye 
have commended yourselves as clear in 
this affair. (ver. 11 4).—In accordance with the 
lively and emphatic style in which the Apostle was 
here writing, this is introduced without an οὖν or 
anything of the kind. Ἔν παντὶ signifies here 
in every respect. Συνεστήσατε is equivalent to 
ἀπεδείξατε (Osiander makes it a collateral idea in 
connection with what he had said of their con- 
ciliatory and just course). With this meaning 
the word has sometimes an accusative of the 
object in connection with it (Rom. y. 8), some- 
times ὅτε, and sometimes as in the present case 
an accus. cum infin. ᾿Αγνος signifies pure, inno- 


CHAP. VII. 2-16. 


131 





cent. In other places it is used with a genitive 
of the offence, but here it is with a dative signi- 
fying with reference to, like ἐλεύϑερος τῇ δικαιο- 
σύνῃ (free from righteousness) in Rom. vi. 20. 
Τῷ πραγματι is a lenient general phrase to avoid 
anything more specific. Burner: “ΗΘ speaks 
indefinitely because the thing was unpleasant.” 
Neander uses this passage to confirm his view, 
that Paul has reference in this epistle nowhere 
to the case of the incestuous person, but to some 
individual in personal hostility to himself. [<If 
the case alluded to here had been that of the in- 
cestuous person, the Corinthians would have had 
no need of showing their innocence in the mat- 
ter, for no one could have supposed them to be 
sharers in such a crime; but if we suppose, that 
it was the case of some individual in personal 
opposition to the Apostle, we can easily see how 
they might have shared in this offence, and how 
they might have shown themselves clear in this 
matter.” | 

Vers. 12-16. Accordingly, though I wrote 
unto you, I didit not for his sake who 
had done the wrong, nor for his sake who 
had suffered wrong. (ver. 12a).--We have here 
an inference [dpa, consequently |] from the effects 
which his first Epistle had produced, with refer- 
ence to his objectin writing it. [The same phrase 
(εἰ καὶ) occurs here which had occurred thrice a few 
sentences before (ver. 8), and in the same sense: 
‘¢Even though I wrote unto you; conceding, as I 
do, that I did 50᾽7. His first inference, as to 
what must have been his motive in writing, is 
stated negatively as to what was not his object. 
From the results which he had recounted in 
their own experience, he wished them to infer 
what must have been his true design, and to 
give up all unfounded surmises with respect to 
his motives. He doubtless had reference to his 
design in writing that portion of the Epistle (1 
Cor. v.) which treated of the matter in hand, 
and its contents; not to the severity or sternness 
of its spirit. The latter could not be alluded to 
without some more specific designation of his 
object. Mryrr expresses it thus: ‘‘Though I 
have not been silent, but have opened my heart 
to you by letter on this matter.” From ἔγραψα 
we may readily conclude what verb must be sup- 
plied in the final sentence It must be, of 
course, “1 wrote.” Neander thinks that ἔγραψα 
refers not to the first Epistle to the Corinthians, 
but to one which has been lost, and which, being 
confined to a single object, may have contained 
some severe expressions. Οὐκ---ἀλλά in this 
place also should not be enfeebled in its mean- 
ing, for the Apostle intended to say that his ob- 
ject in writing had not been to do justice to 
either of these persons, but one far higher. 
Meyer: ‘‘He must, indeed, have written in 
opposition to the wrong doer (ἀδικήσας), and to 
the same extent in favor of the injured one 
(ἀδίκηϑ εἰς), and yet the determining cause which 
had prevailed upon him and had induced him to 
write, was not the case of either of these per- 
sons, but the interest of the Church in general.” 
Most expositors understand ἀδικῆσας as having 
reference to the incestuous person. But who is 
the ἀδικηϑείς ὃ Weare not surprised to find it 
in the Masculine, for this seems demanded by 
its contrast with ἀδικήσας. The neuter—=ddix7- 











ματος would have been not only inconsistent 
with grammatical usage, but without a consis- 
tent meaning, for he had nowhere said any 
thing of the crime itself. That the Corinthians 
were not meant is evident from the use of the 
singular number. He must, therefore, have 
meant either himself, who, as an Apostle, had 
been deeply injured by such a blot upon the re- 
putation of one of his churches, or the father of 
the incestuous person whose conjugal rights had 
been so severely violated. But not only chap. ii. 
5 (οὐκ ἐμὲ λελύπηκεν), but the entire absence of 
any more particular designation (as ἐμοῦ), ar- 
gues very strongly against the former view, 
even though we leave out the improbable exten- 
sion some have given it, by reminding us that 
the man may have become especially vindictive 
against the Apostle, and may have drawn others 
into his party. In behalf of the second view we 
may also suggest that in other places ἀδικεῖσϑαι 
is employed with reference to a violation of con- 
jugal relations. As a reason for the silence of 
the other passages (1 Cor. v. 2, 5 ff.) with re- 
spect to the father, we may remark: that there 
was no occasion, or at least no necessity, for a 
reference to him there. If we make the word 
apply to him, the Apostle must be understood to 
deny that his object was to procure satisfaction 
for him. Neander regards the Apostle as the 
one who had received a personal offence (comp. 
ii. 5). If this were so, Paul would have been 
the ἀδικηϑείς, and we must understand him to 
deny that he wrote under the irritation such an 
injury might be supposed to produce. His real 
object in mentioning the matter at all in a letter 
to them, is brought before us in the next clause 
(which, according to the best established read- 
ing of the text, is):—but that your diligence 
in our behalf might be made manifest 
among you in the sight of God (ver. 12 5)— 
7. e., that your care for us and our work, to help 
us in accomplishing our aims and purposes, and 
in attaining the great objects of our mission, 
might be brought into the light (comp. ver. 11; 
chap. ii. 9). Very likely πρὸς ὑμᾶς appeared in- 
appropriate in this place, and hence the various 
reading: ἡμῶν τὴν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν. But he intended to 
say that by their means or under their direction, 
in the church and in consequence of their active 
exertions in this matter, their zeal in his behalf 
had become apparent. Πρός appropriately desig- 
nates what direction this manifestation had 
taken. The purity or uprightness with which 
this had been done is pointed out by the phrase, 


‘in the sight of God, which evidently was in- 


tended to show the presence in which the mani- 
festation took place. This intimates that they 
ought to make trial of their zeal as in the pre- 
sence of God, and see to it that it was no mere 
pretence or vain form.—Therefore we have 
been comforted: but besides (ἐπί) our 
comfort we have rejoiced more abun- 
dantly in the joy of Titus (ver. 13).—He 
means here to say: On this account, 7. 6., since 
this was our object, and inasmuch as this object 
has been attained (ver. 9ff.), we have been com- 
forted. [The perfect indicates a continued com- 
fort]. If we adopt the reading of the Receptus: 
ἐπὶ TH παρακλήσει ὑμῶν περισσοτέρως δὲ, we must 
take ὑμῶν ποὺ in an active sense, so that the idea 


132 THE SECOND EPISTLE 


would be: “in consequence of the consolation 
afforded me by you;” but in a passive sense, 
according to which the meaning would be: in 
consequence of the comfort you enjoyed after 
the temporary: (πρὸς ὥραν, ver. 8) sorrow my 
epistle caused you, you have found peace by 
means of the repentance (μετάνοια). The word 
παράκλησις in this connection has the sense of 
comfort, not as Reiche maintains, of an admoni- 
tion, as if Paul was comforted on account of the 
favorable result of the severe admonition he had 
given the Corinthians. But the best established 
reading places the δέ immediately after ἐπέ; in 
consequence of which a new sentence must com- 
mence with ἐπί, and the preceding three words 
form a beautiful, impressive and brief sentence 
by themselves (Osiander). We may then regard 
ἐπί as indicating the condition or state in which 
the speaker was with the sense of either, im, or 
still better, iw addition to what had been pos- 
sessed before, as in Matth. xxv. 20, and Luke 
xvi. 26. That which is added is thus regarded as 
based or resting upon that which before existed 
(Passow i. 2, p. 1088 Ὁ). [There is a general 
unity, with a particular diversity, in the mean- 
ing which ἐπὶ bears in this section. Its general 
signification (upon, Jee. 3633, WeBstTER, pp. 174 
—6) is obviously at the basis of each instance of 
its use, and yet this branches out into the special 
meanings, with a dative; on account of (vv. 7, 
13, second time), in aldition to (ver. 13, first 
time), and with a genitive: before, or in the pre- 
sence of (ver. 14). Comp. Exuicorr on 1 Tim. v. 
19]. By περισσοτέρως μᾶλλον (comp. ver. 7) the 
Apostle intended to say that this new joy which 
is added to the previous comfort was more abun- 
dant than that of the comfortitself. The double 
comparative [for eyen in the positive a compari- 
son is implied, and μᾶλλον (found also in Mark 
vii. 86) therefore doubles it] increases the force 
of the expression. The object or reason for this 
joy was the joy of Titus. The latter is more de- 
finitely described when it is added—because 
his spirit had been refreshed by you all. 
ver. 13 0).--These words are not dependent upon 
ἐχάρημεν, asif Paul rejoiced because the spirit of 
Titus had been refreshed; and of course they are 
not parallel with ἐπὶ τῇ χαρᾷ, to define more dis- 
tinctly what the joy of Titus was; but they are 
added to inform us with more precision respect- 
ing the cause of Titus’ joy. The position of 
ἀναπέπαυται at the commencement of the clause 
shows that it was intended to be emphatic. We 
had avarabew τὸ πνεῦμα (they refreshed my 
spirit) once before, in 1 Cor. xvi. 18. The source 
from which the refreshment came is pointed out 
by azo. Another reason for his great joy on 
account of Titus’ joy he proceeds to assign in 
ver. 14.—For if in anything I have boasted 
to him of you I was not made ashamed, 
but as we spake all things to you in 
truth, so also our boasting before Titus 
was found to be truth.—'E: τὰ does not sig- 
nify any doubt as to the fact asserted, but it is 
a delicate mode of expression, common also in 
classical writers, and equivalent to 6 te or ὅσον. 
The dative αὐτῷ should be explained by means of 
the λαλξιν implied in καυχᾶσϑαι. To the nega- 
tive, | was not made ashamed, he adds the posi- 
tive, our boasting was found to be truth. ‘Eye- 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


-_oO YS 





vin, in its logical signification, means here: 
turned out to be, proved to be in accordance 
with facts. ἜἘπὶ has here, as 1 Cor. vi. 1, the 
sense of, before, in the presence of. His object 
was, by way of comparison, to put by the side 
of what he had said to them what he had boasted 
before Titus when he sent him to Corinth and 
when he was anxious to encourage him.» All 
that he had said to them and to him was now 
proved to have been said uprightly. The whole 
passage is apologetical (comp. i. 17 ff.). Πάντα 
must be taken in a general sense, and not applied 
merely to the favorable things he had been say- 
ing to them respecting Titus. Ἔν ἀληϑεῖᾳ has 
an adverbial signification (truly), as in Col. i. 16 
and Jno. xvii. 19. One result of this confirma- 
tion of the Apostle’s boastful assertions, by 
means of Titus’ own experience among the Corin- 
thians, is mentioned in ver. 15, where it is said 
—And his inward affection is more abun- 
dant toward you while he remembers 
the obedience of you all.—ZrAdyyva oc- 
curred before in chap vi. 12. Περισσοτέρως sig- 
nifies: even more than before. Eic¢ ὑμᾶς ἐστιν 
means that he was inclined or attached to them. 
In the phrase ἀναμιμνησκομένου, ete, (recalling to 
himself, JeLr. ἢ 563, 6; Winer, ᾧ 39, 3), he re- 
fers to that which awakened and perpetually sus- 
tained his earnest love toward them, viz: their 
ὑπαποῆ, their obedience to Titus, his deputy to 
them. This sprang up in his heart when he 
learned the spirit with which they had received 
Titus, and it was sustained more especially by 
his lively recollection of the same event.—_How 
with fear and trembling ye received him. 
(ver. 15 6.)—With respect to fear and trembling, 
comp. on 1 Cor. ii. 83. The phrase here signifies 





that profound reverence which they entertained 
for one who had been delegated by Christ’s own 
Apostle, and which made them exceedingly zealous 
lest they should fail in any duty they owed him 
(Osiander, Meyer). He concludes this section with 
an expression of his joyful confidence in them,— 
I rejoice that I have confidence in you 
in all things (ver. 16).—[He here gives the 
conclusion of the whole discussion. The first 
seven chapters had been occupied with subjects 
of a personal nature between him and the Corin- 
thians, and as he is about to leave the subject] 
he gives the result at which he arrives in an 
abrupt appendix (asyndeton, without ovv). The 
proper signification of θαῤῥῶ is simply, I am of 
good courage, not I may or can be of good cour- 
age, as if he had meant merely, that’ he had 
ground for encouragement. As in other pas-— 
sages ϑαῤῥεῶ is never construed with ἐν, when 
the object of confidence is referred to. Meyer is 
inclined to consider ἐν as expressive of the origi- 
nal cause or source of the confidence. (I am of 
good courage through you), and yet the analogy 
of πιστεύειν, ἐλπίζειν and other words of a similar 
meaning, favors the interpretation which seems 
here most natural, viz: with respect to the ob- 
ject: I have confidence concerning, with regard 
to, orin you, [Dr. Hodge thinks that if ϑαῤῥῶ 
cannot, when joined with ἐν, be rendered, I have 
confidence, “ἐν had better be rendered before: 
Istand full of confidence before you, 7. 6, in your 
presence,”’ and he refers to 1 Cor. xiv. 11. He, 
however, with our author, prefers the translation 


CHAP. VII. 2-16. 


158 





given in the common English version. Stanley 
renders the passage: “1 am bold through your 
encouragement.’’] The comprehensive ἐν παντὶ, 
which must here signify, in all things, forms a 
suitable transition to the following section. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1. The inspiration of the sacred writers was not 
inconsistent with the free exercise of all human 
feelings (ver. 8). Even assuming that Paul was 
fully inspired when he wrote the lost Epistle, he 
appears afterwards to have had misgivings re- 
specting it, whether he had: acted under an in- 
fallible Divine influence. Conceding this, we 
may still maintain that every thing which has 
been actually preserved as holy Scripture is in- 
fallibly true and Divine. Men who claimed to 
be, and doubtless were, infallibly inspired in all 
that concerned their official duties, seem to have 
been left to doubts and infirmities at other times 
and in their private relations, like other men 
(Gal. ii. 11; 2 Cor. xii. 7; 1. 15f; Phil. ii. 28). 
‘*Holy men,” whose free human faculties were 
“moved,” informed and directed to any requisite 
extent ‘‘by the Holy Ghost,” appear to have been 
allowed, even in the moment of inspiration, to 
express themselves according to their individu- 
ality of character. Paul’s style and manner of 
expression is unmistakably unlike John’s, or 
David’s, or Jeremiah’s. Different instruments 
of music, even when played upon by the same 
hand, and with equal power, will give forth each 
its peculiar tone. The most plenary inspiration 
was probably consistent with the freest possible 
play of human thoughts and feelings. Comp. 
Lex. on Inspiration, Chap. VI., p. 176ff. Hopae: 
‘‘Inspiration simply rendered its subject infalli- 
ble in writing and speaking as the messenger of 
God. Paul might doubt whether he had in a 
given instance made a wise use of his infallibi- 
lity, as he might doubt whether he had wisely 
exercised his power of working miracles. He 
never doubted as to the truth of what he had 
written.” | 

2. Godly sorrow, or the sorrow which is con- 
formed to the will of God, is one which directs 
the man wholly and only to God. He is troubled 
because he has violated God’s law, has injured 
God’s cause, has dishonored God’s name, and has 
made himself utterly unworthy of God’s holy 
love. In this mere act of renouncing sin there 
must be {nyolved such a radical change of heart 
as must remove all hindrances on man’s part to 
his participation in God’s salvation. It is in it- 
self such a thoroughly purifying fire, as neces- 
sarily implies that its subject is in the way to 
everlasting life. By such a change of disposition, 
which every one must recognize as the work of 
God’s Spirit, he becomes susceptible of, and 
prepared for, every blessing proffered to him by 
Divine grace, and purchased for him by Christ’s 
expiatory work. But there is another kind of 
sorrow which is sometimes felt by men who are 
alienated and estranged from God. They are 
often indignant and offended when their misdeeds 
are brought to light, because they apprehend 
that their reputation and standing among men 
may be injured, when they are brought by pro- 
vidential discipline into various kinds of trouble, 





and when their honor, their earthly possessions, 
or their enjoyments are impaired. They ure not 
disturbed at the thought of sin itself, in its rela- 
tion to God and His kingdom, nor as a violation 
of their duty to their fellow-men, and an impedi- 
ment or a complete destruction to all intercourse 
with God. They who have only this kind of 
sorrow are still in the way of death, of eternal 
perdition, and of everlasting banishment from 
God’s kingdom. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


SrarKkeE :—Ver. 2. Ministers are bound not to 
injure their hearers (e. g., by excessive severity ), 
nor to corrupt them (by false doctrines or wrong 
conduct), nor needlessly to molest or trouble 
them; but their hearers are equally bound to 
love, honor and imitate their ministers.—Ver. 
3. Those who have great success in preaching, 
and have affectionate hearers, may have obtained 
them without any violation of conscience or of 
the duties of their office.—Those who are faith- 
ful are willing to lay down their lives for the 
salvation of their people (chap. xii. 15).—Ver. 
4. To be afflicted for Jesus’ sake, and yet to be 
joyful and confident, implies something above 
human power.—Hepincer:—Ver. 5. The life, 
the work and the love of the Christian may 
sometimes bring him much anxiety ; and yet how 
calm can he be in the midst of commotion! The 
flesh may be in the conflict while the spirit is 
calm! Blessed indeed are they who know what 
this is! John xvi. 83. Spener:—God afflicts His 
people in many ways, and we must not suppose 
His saints to be insensate blocks; they are 
obliged to endure much inward suffering, and 
to feel that they are still men.—Ver. 6. Thou 
who sittest in the dust and art troubled, listen to 
a good friend, whose counsels will cheer and en- 
liven thee again! God sent him to comfort thee! 
Ver. 7. Blessed indeed are they who make such 
a use of their spiritual chastisements! It is the 
mark not only of a good spirit, but of an upright 
minister, when nothing troubles aman more than 
offences among his people. or rejoices him more 
than the removal of them (Jer. xiii. 7; 3 John 
4).—Hepinaer:—Ver. 8 ff. It is never a plea- 
sure to a minister to reprove and disturb his 
people. But when his words reach their hearts 
and produce excellent fruit, it isa blessed of- 
fence and the beginning of a glorious conversion, ἡ 
Hepincger:—That godly sorrow in which the 
sinner repents of his wickedness, not because it 
brings upon him punishment, torment, fears, 
shame and disturbance, but because he has of- 
fended the God who loves him and does him 
good, and in which he would willingly suffer a 
thousand deaths, if he could thereby blot out the 
reality of his guilt, has its source in a union of 
sorrow with filial love, and in a faith which re- 
cognizes the goodness of God and the inconceiva- 
ble abomination of sin (Examples in 2 Sam. xii. 
18; Luke xv. 21; xvili. 18; Matth. xxvi. 75; 
Luke vii. 88). Such a sorrow frees us from 
sin, brings us nigh to God, and makes us parta- 
kers of eternal glory. We can never regret such 
a repentance, even though it occasions us some 
temporary pain, if in the end it leads us to great 
glory.—The sorrow of the world (on account of 


134 


>_< 


worldly losses, fear of punishment, or dishonor) 
will never know any thing of merey from God, 
but it will drive the soul to despair, to new and 
fretful complainings, on account of its condemna- 
tion, and finally to actual hardness of heart.— 
Spencr:—Ver. 11. He who is troubled after a 
godly sort will have his carnal slumbers driven 
from him; and having thus become conscious of 
the power of sin, he will be more watchful 
against it, and will press forward more vigorously 
in the way of the Lord.—The marks of true re- 
pentance are: horror and disgust at sin, delight 
in goodness, and diligence in the pursuit of it.— 
Ver. 13. True love rejoices with those who re- 
joice, and weeps with those who weep (Rom. xii. 
15). Blessed are they of whom their ministers 
can testify and boast much which is good. But 
alas! for those over whom their ministers can 
breathe forth nothing but sighs! (Heb. xiii. 17). 
Uprightness becomes any man but especially 
one who preaches the Gospel. 

Bervens. Biste:—VeER. 3. People are very 
quick in their rage to take what they hear as 
a condemnation of themselves; but if our own 
hearts condemn us not, no man can condemn us. 
—Ver. 4. Within a single hour.a pious soul may 
be in deep affliction and overwhelmed with joy.— 
Ver. 6f. It is one of the mysteries of God’s way 
that Christians must be comforters to one an- 
other. They will thus be joined together as one 
body.—Ver. 8f. (Casstan): ‘* The sorrow which 
worketh repentance is obedient, humble, gentle, 
loving and patient ; for it comes from the love of 
God, and under many and severe trials it will 
never grow weary in following after perfection. 
But the sorrow which the devil gives is harsh, 
impatient, severe, selfish, full of fears, and it is 
sure to drive the man in his ignorance in an op- 
posite direction.” Can God then be served only 
in brooding sorrow? The great point is, what 
reason we have for sorrow, and whither our sor- 
row tends? A true child of God cannot but 
grieve that, during his whole life, he has done so 
little which can be pleasing to his heavenly Fa- 
ther.—Ver.10. Sorrow is usually looked upon 
as something disagreeable, and even spiritless 
and dull; and hence most persons strive to be 
merry and drive away sad thoughts by worldly 
pleasures and luxuries. But while such misera- 
ble expedients leave our nature infected with the 
evil, they bring down upon us additional judg- 
ments, and afford no protection against the gnaw- 
ing tooth of conscience. Still less can false com- 
fort and mere fancies give us relief. We must 
search deep within our souls for the true cause 
of our sorrow, or we shall derive no permanent 
benefit from it. God never afflicts us willingly ; 
but such is our present state, that he can do us 
good in no other way; He is obliged to kill be- 
fore he can give us life. Before we can have any 
true joy, we must sorrow unto repentance. By 
making light of repentance, we only plunge 
deeper into an eternal melancholy. The godly 
sorrow which springeth from God and his love 
leaves nothing behind it but blessedness, for the 
repentance to which it leads is unto salvation. 
The sorrow itself, and all that legitimately flows 
from it, must correspond with the spirit and pur- 
pose of the Being who produced it. Hence, if 
our sorrow comes from God, it must awaken 





ay i. 
‘ 


within us a salutary humility, and a repentance 
which excites us to the exercise of true godli- 
ness, and makes us prayerful, obedient to God, 
patient under trials, kind to our fellowmen, and 
rich in good works; while the sorrow of the 
world will make us sullen and unfit for any use- 
ful work; and yet in this latter state, sad and 
dark as it is, (melancholy), are all those who 
live without God. Even pious souls are not with- 
out temptations to this worldly sorrow. They 
are liable to melancholy (the sorrow of the 
world) when they are discouraged under the tor- 
ments of sin and corruption, under the disorders 
and distractions of spiritual and bodily trials, 
and under the afflictions incident to an inordi- 
nate love of the world. He who has been a mur- 
derer from the beginning, and grudges eve 
happy hour the willing soul spends with its God, 
conceals himself behind all these depressions of 
the believer’s spirit, and aggravates them when 
he pretends to remove them. That dark spirit 
often induces men under extraordinary afflictions 
to forsake that which is good, and deprives them 
of all desire or capacity to enjoy it. The recol- 
lection of sins committed before conversion fre- 
quently contributes much to such a state of mind; 
and hence Christians should pay no attention to 
those representations, in which the serpent, 
under the guise of humility, reminds them of 
abominations, which God himself has blotted 
out and cast into the depths of the sea. In like 
manner we should never despair on account of 
those sinful remnants of former habits which 
continue to beset us even after our conversion. 
—Ver. 11. When a man first obtains a correct 
idea of his own corruption, and is properly hum- 
bled for his sins, his whole heart is aroused, and 
everything there is in confusion. One emotion 
only gives place to another. We set about cor- 
recting everything at once; the thought of for- 
mer sluggishness and security makes us indig- 
nant at ourselves; we tremble under apprehen- 
sions of God’s wrath; we areso anxious to clear 
ourselves in the minds of those whom we have 
offended, that we lose no opportunity to do them 
good; and we burn with zeal to be revenged upon 
the enemy of our souls, by a true repentance and 
a hearty renunciation of every sin. Every pos- 
sible method is resorted to to cast off this hated 
evil of sin, and if we are not as successful as we 
hoped to be at once, we are apt to be perplexed, 
and ata loss what to think or do. Though this 
shows our utter weakness, it is a good sign that 
we have truly repented of sin. It indicates that 
we are thoroughly in earnest, and it is a thou- 
sand fold better than the tranquil state of the 
hypocrite or the self-deceiver. We need not 
doubt that God will be very patient with per- 
sons in such a state. “" That ye are clear!” Past 
offences are easily forgotten when the parties 
are thoroughly reconciled. Our Lord himself 
said to those who had miserably sinned against 
Him, that they were already clean from a regard 
to Him and through the Gospel which He was 
speaking to them (John xy. 3.). Wherever the 
heart is right, He will be satisfied, although He is 
obliged to overlook many improprieties in the 
outward life of His disciples. 

Riecer:—Venrs. 2-7. If we are under the di- 
rection of the Spirit of love and of power and of 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


I ὕ0ὕ..-ο-ο-ς-ς-.ς-....τ  . 





CHAP. VII. 2-16. 





a sound mind, we shall never be at a loss to con- 
duct ourselves so as to avoid showing undue fear 
or favor toward those around us, to meet with 
composure whatever they inflict upon us, and at 
the same time to maintain as far as is in us lies 
their confidence, and to show them that in other 
respects we esteem them, and are satisfied with 
them. ‘The Comforter of those who are cast 
down!” what a precious name for God !—Ver. 8 
ff. How the spirit of a father, yea, of God Him- 
self, is apparent here! For although God does 
not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of 
men, yet when He cannot do them good in any 
other way He brings them into trouble; and, 
like Joseph before his brethren, turns away and 
weeps. We are in continual danger not only of 
being too tender with our brethren, and of with- 
holding from them the needful salt of Christian 
reproof, but of exercising the authority given 
us with such severity as will overwhelm them in 
overmuch sorrow. Ours is the delicate work of 
assisting them in bringing forth godly sorrow. 
Blessed are they who can bring about a harvest 
of joy from a sowing of tears! Those whom 
God’s Spirit makes sorrowful, because they have 
lost God, His grace, His way, and the hope of 
being with Him forever, must see to it that their 
sorrow does not stop short of that repentance 
unto life, which can never be repented of. 
The sorrow of the world must end in death and 
corruption, because it not only fosters erroneous 
views and wrong motives, but engenders power- 
ful, though often secretly indulged lusts which 
mutually strengthen one another. 
Heopner:—Ver. 2. We should receive those 
who love us and are sincerely endeavoring to do 
us good, with the most enlarged affection.—Ver. 
3. The affectionate minister never puts forth a 
severe expression merely to wound, or reprove, 
or condemn any one, but to do him good. To 
accomplish this he is willing to risk every thing 
else.—Ver. 4. Those who are free and candid 
with us, give the best proof that they have con- 
fidence in us.—Ver. 6. God bestows His conso- 
lations only upon the lowly, because they trust 
not to themselves and their own powers, but in 
God alone; and because they know their own 
wretchedness, and sigh and weep over it before 
God. The Lord always looks kindly upon such. 
Often when they are in the deepest affliction He 
is preparing to help and comfort them.—Ver. 7. 
How precious the joy of benefiting others.—Ver. 
8. The purer and the more considerate all your 
conduct is, the less reason will you have to ap- 
prehend future regrets respecting it. A brief 
sorrow which leads to amendment saves us from 
eternal torment.—Ver. 9. The new birth cannot 
be effected without pain.—Ver. 10. The distinc- 
tion between a holy sorrow and the sorrow of 
the world, springs from their different sources. 
The latter is merely a feeling of mortification or 
chagrin under the injuries or the dishonor of 
which sin has been the occasion. The man com- 
plains very little of himself; but against God 
and Divine Providence he not only complains, 
bat sometimes exhibits extreme malice and spite. 
On the other hand godly sorrow lays all the bur- 
dn of guilt upon the sinner, and is full of shame 
and grief for the dishonor which belongs to sin 











hardens his heart, drives him away from God, 
and lands him in despair; while the latter turng 
him from his sins, strengthens his powers, and 
gives him peace with God. The world’s sorrowd 
and the world’s joys are equally worthless. The 
joys it vaunts in society, and the sorrows it en- 
dures all the remaining time.—Ver. 11. The re- 
pentance of a whole congregation for some 
offence it has committed, should not be a merely 
transient emotion of sympathy, but it should lead 
to earnest efforts to remove the offence, and to 
withstand the evil. It is no true love which 
fears to disturb offenders, and is only anxious 
to make their repentance as easy as possible.— 
Ver. 12. Every minister should strive to con- 
vince his people that he has no interest at heart 
but theirs.—Ver 14. A minister should be very 
cautious about boasting of his people or of his 
work among them. He is very liable thus to 
prepare occasions for subsequent mortification. 
Should we afterwards find ourselves deceived, 
the reaction will be painful and the great enemy 
never feels happier than when he finds us in- 
dulging in such boastings. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 3. The Christian life 
extends beyond the present world, and does not 
attain its perfection until after death. Blessed 
is that fellowship in which each one has all 
others in his heart to live and to die with them. 
—Ver. 4. Deeper than the pain God’s ministers 
suffer from a persecuting world, is the pain they 
feel for straying brethren and unthankful chil- 
dren; but they have a joy which no earthly sor- 
row can destroy, a joy which is exceeding abun- 
dant, when these lost sheep return to the fold 
of the Good Shepherd.—Ver. 18. Godly com- 
forts are never wanting where there is godly 
sorrow. It is by the way of repentance that 
God graciously brings to Jesus Christ those who 
sorrow after a godly manner over their fallen 
state.— Ver. 15. How unfounded the common 
impression that a Christian’s love to a brother 
will grow cold in proportion to his knowledge of 
that brother’s sins and imperfections! On the 
contrary, the more it does for him, the warmer 
it grows. 

[Vers. 2-8. I. Paul’s claim to a cordial re- 
ception: 1. Its ground; (a) he deserved it, for 
his blameless life (ver. 2) and for his self-sacri- 
ficing love (ver. 3b); 2. The way in which he 
urged it, (a) so as to give no needless pain (ver. 
3a), (b) with open unsuspecting confidence (ver. 
4). II. His former experience with reference 
to them: 1. He had been compelled to reprove 
them, 2. He had been depressed by great trials 
(ver. 5, comp. ii. 12 f.), 3. God had comforted 
him (ver. 6 f.).—Vers. 9, 10. Power of sorrow: 
I. The sorrow of the world: 1. It has no moral 
basis; 2. It is irreparable; 3. It engenders cor- 
rupt passions. 11. Godly sorrow: 1. Its source 
(God in Christ) proves it right; 2. It estranges 
from all which really can injure us; 3. It 
works out a positive love of goodness; 4. It shuts 
us up into the faith of Christ; 5. It secures 
everlasting salvation.—On the whole section: A 
minister’s joy in his people: 1. When he has a 
large place in their hearts; 2. When they heed 
his admonitions; 8. When their sorrows are not 
entirely worldly; 4. When their sorrow is ac- 


itself. The former only makes the man worse, | cording to God; 5. When this works among 





136 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





them all spiritual graces; 6. When he can safely | ture. Comp. F. W. Ropertson. Serm. VIII., Series 
boast of them, and hope confidently for the fu-} 11. Luerr. L. and LL, and Lisco’s Enwwiirfe.] 


1 
᾿ 
7 
᾿ 


THE COLLECTION. CHAPS. VIII AND IX. 


XIV.—AN EXHORTATION TO FINISH IT. MOTIVE: THE EXAMPLE OF THE MACE- 
DONIAN CHURCHES; AS A’ PROOF OF THEIR LOVE IN GIVING THEMSELVES 
TO CHRIST. - PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY. COMMENDATION OF TITUS, AND HIS 
COMPANIONS IN THIS WORK. 


Cuaprer VIII. 1-24. 


Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of [we make known to you] the grace of 

2 God [which has been] bestowed on the churches of Macedonia; How [om. how] that 
ina great trial of affliction, [was] the abundance of their joy [;] and their deep poverty 

3 abounded unto the riches of their liberality. For to their power, I bear [them] record, 
4 yea, and beyond! their power they were willing of themselves; praying us with much 
entreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us [with much entreaty beseech- 
ing of us the favor (τὴν χάριν) and the participation in] the fellowship of the minis- 
tering to the saints.’ And this they did, [om. this they did] not as we [had] hoped$ 
but first gave their own selves [their own selves gave they first] to the Lord, and unto 
us by the will of God. Insomuch [so] that we [have] desired Titus, that as he had 
begun * so he would also finish in you the same [this] grace also. Therefore, [But] as 
ye abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and 7m all diligence, 
and in your love to us,‘ see that ye abound in this grace also. I speak not by com- 
mandment, but by occasion of [om. occasion of ] the forwardness of others, and to prove 
[to prove also] the sincerity of your love. For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, that though [when] he was rich, yet for your sakes® he became poor, that ye 
10 through his poverty might be rich. And herein I give my advice, for this is expe- 
dient for you, who have begun before [them] not only to dv, but also to be forward a 

11 year ago [to will last year]. Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there 
was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of [according to] that 

12 which ye have. For if there be first [om. first] a willing mind, ἐξ 7s accepted 
[acceptable] according to that a man hath [it may have]® and not according to 

13 that he [it] hath not. For 7 mean not that other men be eased, and’ ye burdened: 
14 But by an equality, shat now at [burdened, but by an equality at] this time your abun- 
dance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for 

15 your want; that there may be equality: as it is written, He that had gathered much had 
nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack. But thanks be to God, which 
put [who is putting, διδόντι] the same earnest care into the heart of Titus for you. 
For indeed he accepted the exhortation; but being more forward, of his own accord he 

18 went unto you. And we have sent with him the brother, whose praise ἐς in the 
19 Gospel throughout all the churches; And not that only, but who was also chosen of 
the churches to travel with us with? this grace, which is administered by us to the 
glory of the same [om. same] Lord, and declaration of your [our]" ready mind: 

20 Avoiding this, that no man should blame us in this abundance which is administered 
21 by us: Providing [for we provide}? for honest things, not only in the sight of the 
22 Lord but also in the sight of men. And we have sent with them our brother, whom 
we have oftentimes proved diligent in many things, but now much more diligent 

23 upon the great confidence which J have [he has] in you. Whether any do inquire 
of [As to] Titus he is my partner and fellow helper concerning you: or [as to] out breth- 
ren be inquired of, [om. be inquired of] they are the messengers of the churches, and 


κῶς OS SF Oar “Or 


ΕΟΎ. 


CHAP. VIII. 1-24. 
Wherefore shew ye to them, and before the churches the proof 


24 the glory of Christ. 


of your love, and of our boasting on your behalf. 


137 





[Since ye will show™ toward them 


proof of your love and of our boasting on your behalf, ye will show’* it before the 


churches]: 


1 Ver. 3.—-Rec. has ὑπέρ, but the predominance of testimony is in favor of παρά. 
[Bloomfield defends ὑπὲρ here as in 2 Lor. i. 8, on the ground that it is the more difficult idiom and so likely 


story gloss. 
to be corrected to make it purer Greek. ] 


Meyer thinks the former an explan- 


2 Ver. 4.—Rec. has δέξασθαι ἡμᾶς, but it was unquestionably an addition, and should be thrown out. 
8 Ver. 5.—Lachmann ivllowing Cod. B. has ἠλπίκαμεν instead of ἠλπίσαμεν. He also has on similar authority ἐνήρξατο 


instead of προενήρξατο. 


His authority however is quite insufficient. 


4 Ver. 7.—Lachmann has ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐν ὑμῖν instead of ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐν ἡμῖν. His authority however is feeble, and his read- 


ing is probably an attempted amendment of the text. 
Arm. versions and one Slav. MSS. 
reading is sustained by C. Ὁ. Εἰ. F. G. K. L. Sin. e¢ al. 


by him in the Corinthians. } 


Urigen has in the Lat.: nostra in vos, and Ambrst. has: tn nobis et vobis. 
11 was more to the Apostle’s purpose to speak of the love awakened. 


{He is sustained only by Cod. B with 10 cursives and the Syr. ana 


The common 


5 Ver. 9.—The authorities for ἡμᾶς instead of ὑμᾶς are much the feeblest. 


6 Ver. 12.—Rec. has τις after ἔχῃ, against the best authorities. 


G. L. Sin., one MSS. of Chrys. and Damasc.] 


7 Ver. 18.—Lachmann following B. ('. and some other Jess important MSS. throws out δὲ after ὑμῖν. 
with him on the ground that it was inserted to bring out the contrast with the preceding. 
Tirch. in his 7th ed. inserts it. 


Cor.) has since been added in favor of δὲ. 


It isan interpolation. [For ἐὰν we have ἀν in B. F. 


Meyer agrees. 
[The authority of Sin. (1st: 
Alford puts it in brackets. } 


8 Ver. 16.—Many MSS. in some respects of importance have δόντι instead of διδόντι, but the change can be explained! 


by an attempt to match the following aorists (Meyer). [C. also adds ἡμῖν.] 
9 Ver. 19.—Rec. has σύν for ἐν, but it is not well sustained, and it is doubtless a gloss. 


{And yet it has for it Ὁ. E. F.. 


G. K. L. and the more powerful Sin. and it is defended by Reiche and Osiander as the more free and appropriate but more - 


uncommon word ] 


10 Ver. 19.—Rec. and Tisch. have αὐτοὺ before τοῦ κυρίου. 
{It has Sin. in its favor, with D. (2d and 3d Cor.) Καὶ. and L. the Syr., 


thinks it has come in by writing the τοῦ twice 
Chrys., Theodt. and Damase. Some cursives have αὐτην.] 


The weight of authority however is against it. Meyer: 


11 Ver. 19.—Kec. has ὑμῶν, but it is not well sustained, and was probably so written because ἡμῶν seemed unsuit- - 


le. 
12 Ver. 21.—Rec. has προνοούμενοι, but it is rather feebly supported. Tischendorf after C. and some MSS. of less 


weight gives προνοούμενοι yap. But the best evidence is in favor of προνοοῦμεν yap. 


[Alford: “Meyer thinks that 


προνοούμενοι was origirally a mere mistake, arising from στελλόμενοι abave; and thus the yap which was at first retained 
from oversight, as in C., was at last erased. Probably προνοούμενοι was introduced from Rom. x1i. 17, where the same 


words occur.” 


Bloomfield still defends Tischendorf’s reading, as the simplest and best confirmed by internal evidence. 


Wordsworth also thinks the first person plural too direct a self-condemnation. ] 


13 Ver. 24.—Rec. has ἐνδείξασθε for ἐνδεικνύμενοι. 
of considerable authority and the Vulgate. 


It is doubtless a gloss. 
Wordsworth defends it.] 


[It is sustained by C., Sin., many cursives 


14 Ver. 24.—Rec. has καὶ before eis πρόσωπον, but it is an interpolation [for it has only an ancient Slay. MS. in its 


favor. And yet it is edited by Griesb. and Scholz. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICATN. 


Vers. 1-6.—But we make known unto 
you, brethren, the grace which God has 
granted among the churches in Macedo- 
nia.—The particle de is here, as in many other 
Places? (1sCor. vil. 1 1}. 15 xii. ἂς xy. 1); 


merely transitional, as the Apostle is passing to | 
| nary ability, and he gives the honor of it to the 


a new section; for although the present section 
is introduced by the concluding sentence of the 
last chapter, it is not directly joined with that sen- 
tence. [We may even question whether the word 
has not something of an adversative significa- 
tion. He had confidence in the Corinthians, he 
had now sufficiently discussed the subjects al- 
ready brought up, and he was now of good cou- 
rage in their presence, but he had another mat- 
ter to introduce to their attention. He wished 
to present before them the important matter of 
the collections which were occupying the atten- 
tion of the Macedonian churches. Stanley en- 
deavors to show that γνωρίζω has always in Paul’s 
earlier Epistles the sense of, to remind, to call 
attention to (1 Cor. xii. 3; xv.1; 2 Cor. viii. 1; 
Gal. i. 11), but that in his later Epistles and 
when the word is in the passive (including Rom. 
xvi. 26) it has the signification of, to discover. The 
evidence he adduces hardly proves this, and we 
see no sufficient reason for making this word an 
exception to verbs of this termination, which are 
causative and carry out the act which is proper 
to the noun from which they are derived. Ac- 
tording to this, the active meaning of our verb 
would be, to make or cause to know. The word 





is used in Eph. vi. 21 οἱ al. What Paul wished’ 
to make known to them for their encouragement 
was [not a matter of which they were already 
informed, and needed only to: be reminded of, 
but] the great liberality of those Macedonian 
churches (Philippi, Beroea, Thessalonica) among 
which he was then laboring, in contributions for 
the impoverished Christians at Jerusalem. He 
says that this was altogether beyond their ordi- 


Divine Author of every grace. In-calling it the: 
grace which God had bestowed on these churches, 

he does not mean that the donation was extraor- 
dinarily large, nor to: magnify the generosity 
which had been erkindled, but simply to awaken 
admiration for the grace which had enkindled it. 

Nor are we to suppose that he wished to imply 
that this was a grace confined to those churches, 

for it was the same: general grace which was. 
acting in other churches, but was especially 
powerful among them. We should not supply an. 
ἐμοί after δεδομένην, nor take ἐν in the sense of a 
dative. The idea is that Divine grace (χάρις τοῦ" 
ϑεοῦ) was liberally communicated in the midst 
of these churches. Meyer confines the expres- 
sion to the influence of grace in its distinctive 
character; as if the Apostle’s object had been to 
point out how gracious God: had been in bestow- 
ing upon them such a generous spirit. [The 
word γάρις has in this section a special applica- 

tion doubtless to the gifts or contributions of the 
people, but these are so named always with re-. 
ference to the Divine favor manifested in them. 

Every enlargement of heart among the people of 
a place may properly be characterized as a put- 


138 





ting forth of Divine grace. And yet it requires 
some constraint to render the word as Stanley 
does in every instance of its occurrence in our 
section by the English term grace (see especially 
ver. 16). In some instances it refers to human 
kindness, and some additional words (as τοῦ 
Yeov) are used to define the subject of its exer- 
cise. Chrysostom suggests that Paul here makes 
prominent its Divine origin to avoid all invidious 
human comparisons, and to stimulate the Corin- 
thians by the hope of being sharers in the com- 
mon grace. We may also remark that the use 
of the word ἐκκλησίαι instead of the more common 
ἀδέλφοι suggests that even at this early period 
Paul was aiming at an ecclesiastical unity. He 
attaches an importance to this collection in the 
churches quite disproportionate to its immediate 
relations. He evidently views it as an expres- 
sion of the common fellowship of Jewish and 
Gentile Christianity. As such he uses it and 
urges it to break down the false views and exclu- 
sive prejudices which had sprung up on both 
sides. He here informs the Corinthians that the 
Macedonian Christians who had suffered much 
from the Jews (Acts xviii. 5ff.), had surmounted 
these prejudices. In this way, too, he lets them 
see that he had not been a disappointed man or 
forsaken of God in his recent labors, and that he 
had some other work than that of correcting 
abuses and vindicating his Apostolic authority ]. 
—That in a great trial of tribulation they 
had an abundance of joy, and their deep 
poverty abounded to the riches of their 
simplicity (ver. 2). The Apostle here specifies 
in greater detail what he had only asserted in 
ver.1. As his object was not to prove what he 
had there said, we must make ὅτε equivalent not 
to for, but to that. Critics, however, have been 
at a loss whether to construe this verse as two 
distinct sentences (supplying ἦν after περισσεία 
τ. yap. αὐτῶν [Syriac, Vulgate, fuit], so that the 
idea shall be that in a great trial of affliction 
there was an abundance of joy); or as only one 
{our English version]. The insertion of ἦν to 
complete the first of these sentences is by no 
means unnatural; and if we attempt to unite 7 
περισσεία τ. Yap. αὐτῶν and ἡ πτωχ. αὐτων, 80 as to 
‘form one subject of a sentence, the whole appears 
harsh and stiff. We prefer the former construc- 
‘tion. We are partially induced to do so because 
the two subjects harmonize so well with the two 
predicates which are then presented, and be- 
wause the other construction requires us to 
combine together two such contrary things in a 
single subject, and to make such a word as 
περισσεία the nominative to a verb so cognate with 
itself as ἐπερισσεύσεν. But these are not our 
main reasonsfor this preference. For even if, 
by adopting the latter construction, we must 
unite such expressions as περισσεία τῆς χάρας and 
éreptoceioev as subject and predicate (making 
the ydépa either the joyful preparation for the 
collection, as Meyer does, or the happy enjoy- 
ment of religion after conversion, as Osiander 
does), it seems nevertheless more appropriate to 
find expressed in the double subject of a single 
sentence those factors which complete one an- 
other in the περισσεύειν, and which unite and co- 
operate to prove that the grace of God and some- 
thing higher than mere human kindness was 











THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


« 





moving the actors. This will be still more ap- 
parent as we proceed to explain the individual 
expressions. The first thing to which the Apos- 
tle draws attention is the condition or state of 
the congregations in which this liberality so 
abounded. They were in a great trial of afflic- 
tion (ἐν πολλῇ δοκιμῇ ϑλίψεως) This word 
δοκιμῆ Which Paul uses in a number of other 
places in his Epistles (chap. ii. 9; ix. 13; xiii. 
8; Phil. ii. 22; Rom. v. 4), in the sense of verifying 
or proving a thing to be real, has here rather 
the sense of subjecting a thing to a trial or test. 
It is true, indeed, that the verification or 
proof might be looked upon as the moral basis 
of their joy (Meyer), but it is more natural here 
to regard the affliction as that which tended to 
prevent their joy, and hence as showing that 
their joy must have been the result of a mighty 
faith triumphing over such hindrances. The 
δοκιμῆ, therefore, would be properly the trial 
which subjected them to atest. We allow, how- 
ever, that in all other passages of the Apostle’s 
writings, the context requires that the word 
should mean, a verifying or proving a thing to be 
true. The idea is the same as that contained in 
chap. vii. 4, viz.: ‘in all our affliction.” With 
respect to this affliction, comp. 1 Thess. i. 6; ii. 
14 ff.; Acts xvi. 20 ff.; xvii. 5. Περισσεία τῆς χαρᾶς 
signifies, the overflowing or abundance of their 
joy, ὦ. ὁ., of the joy they had in the fellowship of 
Christ and in the assurance of their salvation 
(chap. vii. 10; Phil. iv. 4). This opened their 
hearts to contribute liberally for the relief of their 
brethren (comp. Melancthon in Osiander, p. 299), 
and so completely raised them above all thought 
of their persecutions and the poverty of their 
own means, that they went far beyond those 
who possessed a greater abundance. There was 
energy enough in this joyful faith to make deep 
poverty an abundant source of benevolent ac- 
tion. In the following words the joy and the 
poverty are represented as conspiring together 
for this result. The plural ἡ xara βάϑους πτωχεία 
signifies properly a poverty which goes down to 
the very depths, and it presents us the figure of 
a vessel which is almost empty and into which 
we must reach down deep. And yet this vessel 
is made to overflow as if it were full. [Apam 
CrLarKE: ‘Poverty and affliction can scarcely 
ever be spoken of in an absolute sense; 
they are only comparative. Even the poor are 
called to relieve those who are poorer than 
themselves; and the afflicted to comfort those 
who are more afflicted than they are.”] It 
abounds εἰς τὸν πλοῦτον τῆς ἁπλότητος αὐτῶν. The — 
word ἁπλότης signifies not exactly goodness of 
heart, benignity generosity, but the disposition 
which includes true charitableness, or gives it 
an external form. Comp. Rom. xii. 8 (ὁ μεταδι- 
δοὺς ἐν ἁπλότητι). It is the simplicity which is 
superior to all selfish considerations or interests, 
and confines its attention entirely to the wants 
of our brother, gives itself completely up to the 
will of God, delights to be the instrument of His 
merciful providence, and has no fears that God 
will ever allow such a one to be in want [comp. 
Trencu Synn. 2 Part, p. 23]. The simplest ex- 
planation of ἐπερίσσευσεν εἰς is that which makes 
it assert that the riches which in their simplicity 
they possessed, and the liberal contribution 


CHAP. VIII. 1-24. 








which intheir simplicity they had made, was in 
reality the overflowing stream of their deep 
poverty transformed by a joyful faith into an 
abundance. In vy. 3-5 we have an explanation 
of this περισσεύειν. [SranteEy remarks that 
“this sentence is completely shattered in pass- 
ing through the Apostle’s mind. If restored to 
order it would be, ‘how that to their power and 
beyond their power, they voluntarily gave, not 
as we trusted the gift (or grace, τὴν χάριν, 7. e., 
of their possessions), but their own selves.’” 
But as the Apostle wrote this, his mind glowed 
more and more as it proceeded, and he attached 
to each phrase some additional thought, until 
the whole completely breaks down under the 
weight of extraneous matter. |—For according 
to their power, I bear witness, and be- 
yond their power, of their own accord, 
with much exhortation beseeching of us 
the grace and fellowship of the ministra- 
tion to the saints—(vv. 3, 4). We might, 
indeed, regard ὅτε for as parallel to the same 
word in ver. 2; ‘‘that they,” ete. But we think 
it better to regard ver. 3ff. as an explanation 
(a proof) of the way in which their deep poverty 
had abounded. Ὅτι would then be equivalent 
to, for. He proves that they gave κατὰ δύναμιν 
by inserting μαρτυρῶ in a parenthesis, thus im- 
plying that he was well acquainted with their 
pecuniary ability. The reason they were so re- 
duced in circumstances probably was, that they 
had been the victims of persecution and had 
found it difficult successfully to pursue their or- 
dinary callings on account of the hatred of un- 
believers. W.F. Besser: ‘‘They were poor for 
Christ’s sake, because the Macedonian Chris- 
tians had been obliged to renounce all dishonest 
arts of trade (1 Thess. iv. 6), and had been per- 
secuted with the loss of employment, dismissal 
from service and apprehensions of complete des- 
titution (Phil. i. 28). [Dr. Arnold mentions 
that Macedonia was the especial theatre of three 
successive civil wars not far from this time, that 
the people were heavily taxed by their conquer- 
ors, and that the mines from which much of 
their wealth was derived were in the possession 
of the government. So desolate had their fine 
country become, that it was fit only for pastu- 
rage. On the petition of the people for relief, 
they were transferred from the senatorial to the 
imperial jurisdiction that they might escape 
taxation. In the meantime Corinth, under the 
special favor of the emperors, since its revival 
under Julius Cesar, had been growing rapidly 
in wealth. Comp. Stanley and Hodge]. And 
yet these Macedonian Christians had gone not 
merely up to, but beyond the ordinary measure 
of their power. Παρὰ δύναμιν has the same 
meaning as ὑπὲρ δύναμιν in the Textus Recep. 
(comp. i. 8), ὁ. e., beyond their power (παρά sig- 
nifies first, one thing going along by the side of 
another, thea something not in contact with an- 
other, or rather something remaining external 
to another, and finally in opposition to another. 
Passow and de Wetie). The only correct con- 
struction assumes that ἔδωκαν of ver. 5 is the 
principal verb, to which all the other clauses 
form only a detailed qualification (and not 
αὐϑαίρετοι with ἦσαν understood, since with this 
the preceding expressions would not agree; nor 





139 


δεόμενοι with ἦσαν understood; nor yet καϑὼς 
ἠλπίσαμεν with ἐγένετο or ἐποίησαν understood), 
After these quantitative phrases (κατὰ---καὶ rapa 
δύναμιν) we have those which are qualitative, i. 
e., describing the way or manner in which the 
gift was made: αὐϑαίρετοι, freely, in opposition 
to over-persuasion or necessity [excluding all 
human, but not Divine influences]. Such an 
assertion is not inconsistent with what is said in 
chap. ix. 2ff. For he does not, in this latter 
passage, say precisely that he had requested 
them at first to contribute, but that his boasting 
of them the year before had been the occasion 
which God had used (διὰ ϑελήμ. ϑεοῦ, ver. 5), for 
exciting the churches of Macedonia of their own 
accord to resolve upon their action, and then 
that the zeal of these churches had reacted upon 
the Corinthians. The proof and the more full 
explanation of αὐϑαίρετοι is given in ver. 4. 
‘‘We prayed not them, but they us.’’ Curysos- 
rom. δέομαι, with the genitive of the person 
entreated, and the accusative of the thing asked 
for, occurs not unfrequently in the classic 
writers, (among whom, however, the accusative 
is always a pronoun). The object of the 
prayer was the χάρις, by which was intended 
the favor or kindness. This is immediately 
defined more particularly by the phrase κοινω- 
viov τῆς dtakov.—dylovc, which is connected 
with it by καί (‘‘even”). The Apostle might 
have written: χάριν τῆς κοινωνίας, but this 
would have been too great an accumulation of 
genitives. Avaxovia has here the sense of, minis- 
tration, support (comp. Acts vi. 1 and xi. 29); 
and it is the same as the Aoyia spoken of in 1 
Cor. xvi. 1, where εἰς τοὺς ἀγίους is subjoined, and 
reveals what must have been the motive of the 
prayer here (Meyer). But the κοινωνία indicates 
a participation in the service. [The main idea 
of κοινωνία undoubtedly is that of a common 
unity in sympathy, labors and responsibilities. 
But the ancient Greek expositors make especi- 
ally prominent the idea that in all communica- 
tions of assistance there was a mutual benefit. 
Thus THreopHyutact: ‘‘as if it were a common 
gain for both the givers and receivers;” and 
Orcumentus: ‘the calls almsgiving a κοινωνὶαν 
because those who give and those who receive are 
joint participants in a divine blessing.” ] If we 
govern these accusatives (τ. χάριν κ. τ. κοινωνίαν) 
by ἔδωκαν (Bengel) the construction becomes un- 
necessarily confused, and we have no definition 
of the object of δεόμενοι. The true object of 
ἔδωκαν is easily understood from its own idea.— 
The free self-determination of the Corinthians is 
brought into very clear light here when it is said 
that they entreated with much importunity (μετὰ 
πολλῆς παρακλήσεως) as if it would be a favor or 
kindness to them, that they might have some part 
in the common work of relieving the impover- 
ished members of God’s church (aycovc).—If we 
receive the reading of the Receptus: δέξασθαι 
ἡμᾶς (after ἁγίους); the meaning of χάρις (the fa- 
vor) would be: the contribution; and in the sub- 
sequent sentences it will be shown to consist of 
collections taken up also in other congregations. 
—Finally, the apostle says—And not as we 
expected but themselves they gave first 
to the Lord and to us by the will of God. 
(ver 5).—They gave beyond his expectations, 


140 


SS Se  — σαντο ον 


The middle and aorist ἠλπίσαμεν refers to the 
eeling as ‘‘belonging to the inner world of the 
agent” (WiveR αὶ 89. 3. ὅκα, ᾧ 863. 5, 6), and 
shows in a lively manner how the apostle, after 
granting their prayer, had been busy in forming 
expectations and desires respecting the manner in 
which they would participate in the work, The 
verb expresses more than an anticipation (Cros- 
by) or expectation (B. Bible Union); and it is not 
incorrectly translated in the English, the German 
(hofften), and the Valgate (speravimus) ver- 
sions. The positive reason for this surprise 
was, that ‘‘they gave their own selves.” This 
refers not to their conversion, which must have 
taken place some time before; nor does it imply 
that they then proposed themselves as the bear- 
ers of their alms; but it simply asserts that they 
surrendered themselves and all that they pos- 
sessed to the disposal of God and the apostles. 
This was a self-dedication which involved a com- 
plete renunciation of all personal interests. They 
gave themselves, first to the Lord and then to 
His apostle; for they were anxious above all 
things thus to show their grateful love to Christ, 
their Redeemer. With this was inseparably 
united a desire to honor the man who had brought 
them to Christ and had originally suggested. to 
them this charity («ai here means simply:. and, 


and it implies the intimate connection of the two; 


acts; comp. Ex. xiv. 31, Acts xv. 28). Πρῶτον 
(first) is not designed to say that they didi this 
before he asked them, for this had already been 
said in ver. 4, and would require that πρῶτον 
should stand before éavroic; nor does it meam 
[as seems implied by the position of the word 
“first” in our Engl. A. V.] that they gave them- 
selves before they gave their alms, and then left 
it to the apostle to determine the amount they 
should give; for to bring out such an idea some- 
thing more needed to have been said. Moreover 
the Apostle does not mean that they gave them- 
selves first to the Lord and then to him, making 
καί equivalent to ἔπειτα ; for not only would this 
imply an unsuitable separation of the two objects 
of the action, but no instance can be found in 
which καί stands for ἔπειτα. It is to be taken as 
in Rom. i. 16 and ii. 9f. in the sense of a gra- 
duation. If anything is to be supplied it must 
be expressive of some relation to the objects of 
the bounty, [Os1ANDER: ‘*who were unknown 
and of no interest to them except through the 
Lord and the apostle.”’] Διὰ ϑελήματος ϑεοῦ is 
added, not merely to explain καὶ ἡμῖν (as if he 
had said: God, who made me an Apostle, re- 
quired them to give themselves to me also); but 
as a reason for the whole transaction, to show 
that they had been induced thus to surrender 
themselves by a regard for the will of God. 
Such a meaning of διά implies also the sense of 
xatd.—_So that we have besought Titus, 
that as he had before begun, so he would 
complete among you the same grace (cha- 
rity) also (ver. ().—In this verse the apostle 
passes from the Macedonian to the Corinthian 
church, and shows how he was induced by what 
he saw among the former, to request Titus, efc. 
Εὶς τό does not designate here a continuation 
of what the Macedonians were praying, for 
there is no probability that they had any such 
design in their surrender of themselves. Nor 











THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


— 


need we even suppose that the apostle intended 
thereby to signify what was the divine will in 
the case. Ely merely expresses the product and 
the result; that which proceeds from or ig 
reached by something (Passow, εἰς v. 1, 4); itis 
therefore equivalent to ὥστε, and is much the 
same as iva. - The thing requested, of Titus, and 
which is expressed here as if it was the object 
intended (iva) was, that Titus would complete 
what he had commenced when he was before in 
Corinth, 7. e., that he would complete this grace, 
this charity, or demonstration of their love. 
The καί before τὴν χάριν refers not to ταύτην, as 
if there was some other χάρις which Titus had 
begun and now needed to finish, but to this 
among other proofs of love which he was to bring 
to perfection. The πρὸ in προενήρξατο has refer- 
ence not to a priority to the παρακαλεῖν, nor to a 
priority to the efforts made to collect funds 
among the Macedonians and. the earlier com- 
mencement of the Corinthian collection (for the 
latter idea would need to have been more dis- 
tinctly expressed.) [Os1anpER: ‘but it probably 
contrasts the present journey of Titus bearing 
the epistle, with the former. Osiander also calls 
attention to the fact that ‘‘évapy. with its simple 
verb.and several of its other composite forms, as 
érapy., katapy., etc., 18 like the corresponding 
words connected with ἐπιτελεῖν, familiarly in use 
as sacrificial language. This would be appro- 
priate to the idea here of a complete surrender 
of themselves to the service of the Lord and his 
church.] Eic¢ ὑμᾶς either must mean, with re- 
spect to, you, or must be equivalent to ἐν ὑμῖν, a 
concise expression for ἐλϑὼν εἰς ὑμᾶς. The re- 
quest must therefore refer to the time when the 
Apostle sent Titus again to Corinth with this 
epistle. [In 1 Cor. xvi. 1, the Apostle had 
spoken of making collections for the saints, and 
it is. probable therefore that Titus had then com- 
menced a fund for this object among the Corin- 
thians. This work had therefore been started 
in Corinth some months before it had been acted 
upon in Macedonia (2 Cor. vy. 10.). This re- 
quest of the apostle to Titus could not refer to 
a former but to the present visit of Titus at Co- 
rinth. CHrysostom: ‘*When the Apostle saw 
the Macedonians so vehement and fervent in all 
things even under great temptations, he sent 
Titus to quicken the action of the Corinthians, 
that they might be made equals. He does not 
indeed say this, but he implies it, and thus shows 
the greatness and delicacy of his love, which 
could not allow the Corinthians to be inferior.’ ] 

Vers. 7-15.—But as ye abound in every 
thing, in faith, and utterance, and know- 
ledge, and all diligence, and your love to 
us, abound also in this grace (ver.7). The 
ἀλλ᾽ is not intended here to have the sense of 
but (Ger. sondern) which separates the following 
from the former part of the sentence, and nega- 
tives it (φ. d., J knew, however, when I made 
this request that I should not be disappointed, 
but that you would be distinguished in this 
matter also); nor has it the sense of, rather 
(let not Titus be under the necessity of exciting 
you to activity, but rather, ete.), for both of there 
ideas are arbitrary interpolations. It is a sud- 
den turn of expression, abruptly leaving the to- 
pic before spoken of, and it is equivalent to the 








CHAP. VIII. 1-24. 


14] 





Latin, at (Ger. aber). Asif he had said: ‘But 
we need not assign reasons of this kind: for as 
ye have been remarkable in all that ye have 
done, so will ye be in this exhibition of your be- 
nevolence.” (The emphasis should be placed 
upon ταύτη; in this, as in other manifestations of 
your charity). There are other places in which 
ἀλλά makes a transition to a summons (Mark 
ἈΠ κ 6. νη: 75. Acts ix. ὍΣ xt) 20). No 
longer insisting upon those encouragements 
which the conduct of others supplied, he turns 
now to them, and calls upon them to show in 
this business also the preéminence they had ex- 
hibited in other things. “Iva περισσεύητε is a 
circumlocution for an imperative [Vulg.: videte 
ut], as in Eph. v. 83; Mark y. 23. (In like 
manner we have in the older Greek more fre- 
quently ὅπως with aconjunction [WesstTeR, Synt., 
p- 129]. To the Apostle’s thought it is necessary 
that we should supply here a summons to duty. 
It is therefore not indispensable that we should 
connect this expression with ver. 8, for it is ra- 
ther contrary to Paul’s manner to begin his cor- 
rections of others’ misapprehensions with an 
ov λέγω (chap. vil. 80; 1 Cor. iv. 14). He makes 
his appeal to their sense of honor as Christians; 
though it is self-evident that such general com- 
mendation must be understood with individual 
exceptions. ’Hv παντί is a general phrase, which 
is explained immediately afterwards (Meyer: Itis 
the general relation in which they had been distin- 
guished for faith, ete.). Πίστις means here, not 
asin 1 Cor. xii. 9, but as in chap. i. 24, a faith- 
ful adherence to Christian truth. Their abound- 
ing in this was their animation, assurance and 
activity in faith. With respect to λόγος and γνῶσις 
see on 1 Cor. i. 5. [Hopax: ‘The former is 
Christian truth as preached, the latter truth as 
apprehended or understood]. The word σπουδῇ 
occurs in chap. vii. 11f., and signifies an ardent 
zeal in the work of Christ. Πάσῃ here means not 
that which is complete, but, in manifold aspects 
(it is extensive, not intensive). ᾿Εξ ὑμῶν ἐν ἡμῖν 
signifies that which proceeds from you, fastens 
upon us, and is received in our hearts; év is not 
exactly equivalent to εἰς, comp. chap. vii. 8. In 
ver. 8 he meets in advance an objection which 
might be urged against the preceding demand— 
I say this not by way of commandment, 
but by means of the forwardness of others 
to prove the sincerity of your love.—A 
similar expression (οὐ κατ᾽ ἐπιταγῆν) is used in 1 
Cor. vii. 6, and it here refers primarily to what 
he had said in the previous verse, but the posi- 
tive details, beginning with ἀλλὰ, etc., refer back 
to vers. 1-6; for he must naturally have had the 
Macedonians in view when he spoke of the for- 
wardness of others. δΔόκιμαζειν does not signify 
here comprobare (to approve, or to establish by 
proof), nor is it equivalent to δόκιμον ποιεῖν (to 
make display), but, as in 1 Cor. xi. 28, it signi- 
fies, to make trial, to test, or examine. The 
zeal of the Macedonians ought to stimulate the 
Corinthians to a similar zeal, and thus it should 
be proved whether their love was genuine. The 
participle δοκιμάζων depends upon λέγων, which 
should be understood again after ἀλλά (but I 
speak as one who is making a trial of, or putting 
to a test your love); comp. 1 Cor. iv. 14. To 
show that he was justified in this δοκιμάζειν. and 








that he had good reasons for making such de- 
mands upon their fraternal liberality, he adduces 
the example of Christ, in that great act of mercy 
in which he gave up all things for their sakes. 
—For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, that though He was rich, yet for 
your sakes He became poor (ver 9). This 
reference is very significant; but in this connec- 
tion forms a logical parenthesis; and while it 
was designed to incline them also to deny them- 
selves for their brethren, it was intended to make 
their most self-denying charities appear utterly 
insignificant. The idea of an example is certainly 
subordinate in this place to that of the merit of 
Christ’s love, through which a corresponding love 
might be awakened in them. But the mean- 
ing is certainly not that Christ had made them 
spiritually rich (in love), and thus they had be- 
come possessed of the inclination to contribute and 
had been prepared to contribute of their (earthly) 
abundance (Olshausen). For πλουτεῖν cannot 
here signify that they were enriched in this 
sense, but that they possessed an abundance of 
those saving benefits which Christ had acquired 
for His people by His becoming poor (comp. 1 
Cor. iii. 22; Matth. v. 5; xix. 29). [The ancient 
Gree] expositors took γενώσκετε as an imperative, 
and Chrysostom makes, this prominent: ‘For, 
have in mind, says Paul, ponder and consider the 
grace of God, and do not lightly pass it by, but 
aim at realizing the greatness of it,” ete. The 
yap shows that this is inappropriate. The choice 
of this verb, and especially of the present, in- 
stead of the customary οἴδατε or ἐγνώκατε, seems 
strange, and almost implies a direct act of recog- 
nition, but it thus signifies that their apprehen- 
sion of the fact must have been especially vivid 
and continued, instead of being indistinct and 
fished]. The Apostle reminds them of the 
spirit which, as they well knew, Christ had 
shown toward them, in that free (unmerited) act 
of grace, in which for their sakes He had become 
poor. To make this grace appear in a clearer 
light, its subject is here designated τοῦ κυρίου, in 
which the Divine dignity of Christ and His abso- 
lute right to His people (ἡμῶν) is expressed. The 
way in which this gracious, self-renouncing love 
was exhibited to men is presented in the epexe- 
getical sentence: that for our sakes He became 
poor. The example is placed before us in a 
light corresponding to the object the Apostle had 
in view, and substantially agreeing with what is 
said in Phil. ii. 7. When He was rich (πλούσιος 
ὧν, part. imperf.), must refer to His existence 


‘before He came to this world, when He was in 


possession of the Divine glory and had an abun- 
dance of possessions; and not to His existence on 
earth as the God-man, as the λόγος ἔνσαρκος; for 
in the latter case the ov and the ἔπτώχευσεν would 
have been in the same tense. The reference is 
not to the state in which He was huniliated, but 
as the aorist certainly makes more probable, to the 
act in which He divested Himself of His riches. 
Although the idea of ‘becoming poor”’ is not in- 
volved in the meaning of the verb itself [for it 
may possibly signify simply ‘‘ being poor.” JEP. 
(% 330, 2, a.): ‘* Verbs in ew have generally an 
intransitive signification of being in some state, 
or in possession of some quality ’’], yet the aorist 
by its own nature essentially involves the idea 


142 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





of an intransitive action or state, like ἐπίστευσα 
and similar words. Πτωχεύειν in classical au- 
thors has the same sense of to beg, then to be a 
mendicant, and in all cases it implies a deep po- 
verty in which one has nothing. (WEBSTER Synn. 
under πένης and πτωχός, p. 227]. The word it- 
self has reference neither to the comparative nor 
to the absolute poverty of Christ during His 
earthly life (Matth. viii. 20), but to the relation 
which the human life He then entered upon bore 
to the life of glory which He was leaving. We 
recognize in it a κένωσις, by virtue of which He 
renounced His riches, not merely in the use 
(κατὰ χρῆσιν) but in the possession (κατὰ κίησιν) 
of them. His incarnation was a becoming poor 
in the strictest sense, an entrance upon the state 
of a human creature, who possessed nothing in 
himself, but had to receive everything from 
God. This act was even repeated in His earthly 
condition when He submitted to receive the minis- 
trations of His grateful disciples that He might 
live respectably with His people and yet share 
in their necessities. That the appellation [κυρ. 
"Inc. xp-] would not be unsuitable to the being 
who thus became poor, is manifest from what is 
said of the same exalted personage in Col. i. 15 f. 
The ethical signification of such an instance is 
just as natural as it is in Phil. ii. 6ff.; but cer- 
tainly the idea of an example is not here exclu- 
sively presented (see above). Πλουτεῖν is found 
in 1 Cor. iy. 8. ’Exeivov is emphatic. Although 
the act here spoken of was for all men, the Apos- 
tle makes it more impressive by using the words, 
for your sakes (δι᾽ ὑμᾶς), and so giving it a special 
reference to those who were to read his words. 
—And I give an opinion in this matter; 
for this is expedient for you (ver. 10 a).— 
In these words he proceeds to give the detailed 
statement which had been interrupted by the 
motive presented inver. 9. In contrast with the 
command he here presents his opinion as in 1 
Cor. vii. 25. The collocation of the words shows 
that the emphasis should be placed upon this 
word. Inthe causal sentence which follows it, 
we must therefore understand ‘his (τοῦτο) as re- 
ferring to γνώμην δίδωμι, although ἐν τούτῳ must 
have referred back to the collection. As it 
stands at the head of the sentence it must be em- 
phatic, but next to it the emphasis must be laid 
upon ὑμῖν, By means of συμφέρει (not—decet) 
he intended to say that this advice was better 
for them than a command would have been, in- 
asmuch as they had for some time shown them- 
selves willing to act as he wished without a com- 
mand. Such persons could derive greater moral 
advantage from a word of counsel than from 
any injunction. If τοῦτο is referred to the act 
of charity proposed, then σνμφέρει would have to 
be understood as relating to the benefits which 
result from every good action, to the advantages 
of a good reputation, and to the moral gain 
which might be expected, or finally the reward 
which God will give at the last day (promerere 
Deum).—Who began before them not only 
to do but also to be willing the last year. 
(ver. 10, 6)—With οἴτενες (here, as in Rom. i. 25, 
equivalent to, ut qui, suck as), he introduces the 
reasons for saying that this was more profitable to 
them. It is remarkable that the doing should be 
mentioned before the williny, for we should natu- 








rally have expected the words in the reverse order. 


To attempt an inversion of the terms soas to make - 


the sentence read: not only to will but also to do, 
would be arbitrary and plainly inadmissible. 
Some have endeavored to aid us by making ϑέλειν 
have the sense of, ¢o be inclined to do; but this 
would make it inconsistent with ver. 11, where, 
in the first place, the exhortation to complete the 
doing must of course be not simultaneous with, 
but subsequent to the willing (Meyer), or even 
the greater and more important of the two 
(Fritzsche); and secondly, the willing and the 
practical performance (ὅπως καϑάπερ k. τ. A.) are 
so related that we must infer that the willing 
was an independent thing, by itself, and not 
equivalent merely to an inclination to do, and it 
must be an inherent element in the doing. Others 
have suggested that ποιῆσαι might refer to an 
actual commencement of the collection before 
the time of writing, and ϑέλειν to the disposition 
to give still further (the infinitive present, which 
on the previous explanation seemed strange, 
would be appropriate to this). Others still 
make the meaning to be, that many had then 
actually begun to make contributions, while 
some had declined to do so, and ver. 11 would 
then be a calling upon them to carry into actual 
execution their further intentions, and so te 
complete the collections which had been com- 
menced. But on this interpretation we are 
obliged to give to ϑέλειν a fulness of meaning 
which it will not bear. The true way is proba- 
bly that which makes the πρὸ in προενήρξασϑε re- 
fer, not to some time before the Apostle’s writing, 
but to the period of the collections in Macedonia. 
The idea then would be, that the Corinthians 
were in advance of the Macedonians, not only in 
the accomplishment, but also in the original pur- 
pose; in the preparation of those arrangements 
for the collection (comp. chap. ix. 2), the continu- 
ance of which seems implied in the infinitive of 
the present. Thus de Wette, Meyer, et al. Νὲ- 
ANDER suggests, that ‘the will of a person may 
sometimes far exceed what he does, for he may 
desire to do more than he is able to perform. 
In this case the will is greater than the doing.” 
In ἂπὸ πέρυσι ( from last year), the Apostle doubt- 
less referred to the mode of reckoning yearly time 
which was customary among the Jews, and was 
also common and well known in the churches, 
This differed very little from the Macedonian me- 
thod, for both commenced their year in Septem- 
ber. The Apostle means not a year ago, but ‘the 
last year,” 7. 6. in the present case probably six 


months before.—But now complete the 


performanse of it also; that as there was 
the readiness to will so there may be the 
performance according to what ye have 
(ver. 11).—Having thus disavowed any wish to 
command but only to counsel them in this mat- 
ter, he here proceeds to call upon them at once 
to complete a work which he regarded as no less 
important than at first. The νυνὶ dé in contrast 
with ἀπὸ πέρυσι, as also the aorist imperative, 
implies that the matter was rather pressing and 
urgent.—The final sentence also implies that 
such a course would be becoming in them, for 
otherwise the doing would not correspond with 
the willing. But for willing (%éAew) he now 
substitutes the readiness to will (προϑυμία τοῦ 








CHAP. VIII. 1-24. 


143 


a ---σποοστος πῶς ποτε, τας τ πεῆτπ-ν - αξτσ-πετ πππεπασα- ἐπύτε  π ππασσυσιι τ ταασπα τς ἡ 


ϑέλειν), in which he more precisely expresses 
the completeness of their purpose (inclination, 
zeal), and encourages them with an avowal of 
his confidence. In like manner, for ποιῆσαι he 
substitutes ἐπιτελέσαι, which involves the entire 
performance or practical completion of what had 
been intended. The whole is more particularly 
defined by the subjoined phrase out of what ye 
have (ἐκ τοῦ ἔχειν), which is further explained 
afterwards. The ἐκ designates in this place the 
particular respect in which a thing is to be mea- 
sured or regarded. It has the sense of: accord- 
ing to, or in conformity with, as in such phrases 
as ἐκ τῶν παρόντων, according to what a man has; 
according to his ability. Hither ῃ or γίνηται must 
be understood (an ellipsis of the subjunctive of 
εἶμι which is very uncommon with Greek writers). 
The Corinthians would probably have said: we 
would contribute to this cause very willingly ; and 
he now tells them that their performance should 
correspond with such a willingness, and that 
they should contribute according to their ability. 
—Further light is thrown upon ἐκ τοῦ ἔχειν in 
ver. 12, where the Apostle defines how far an 
act of kindness is acceptable to God, viz.—For 
if there be the willing mind, it is accep- 
table, according to what it may have and 
not according to what it has not,—~. e. in 
proportion to the degree in which the free con- 
sent which the Apostle had all along presupposed, 
is actually in the heart. The preposition πρό in 
πρόκειται has here no reference to time [as is 
implied in the E. V.], but it simply signifies: 
lies before us, is present, is in sight. In the 
apodosis of this sentence προϑυμία is the personi- 
fied subject, and there was no need of inserting 
a τις. In εὐπρόσδεκτος, with ἐστιν understood, 
God was unquestionably in the writer’s mind. 
[OstanpeR: the word shows the sacrificial nature 
of the act.] Καϑὸ ἐὰν ἔχῃ. k. τ. 2. signifies: ac- 
cording to that it [ἢ ὁ. ἡ προϑυμία : the disposi- 
tion] may have, and not according to that it 
hath not, z. 6. God judges of them and has plea- 
sure in them according to that which they had, 
etc., he does not call for what is beyond our 
power; but the small gifts of the poor man who 
would gladly give more, are as acceptable as the 
large gift of one who possessed an abundance 
(comp. Mark xii. 44).—’Edy (---ἄν) signifies that 
certain conditions are supposed to be out of the 
question in the case of him who has not, which 
are implied in the case of him who has.—The 
idea expressed in ver. 12 is further illustrated by 
what he proceeds to say in ver. 13, with respect 
to the object of the collection proposed. In the 
first place he declares negatively:—-For it is 
not that others may be eased and ye 
burdened but by an equality—He means 
that his object was not that others (here: the 
Christians of Jerusalem, not other churches, 
with whom he had nothing to do) should be 
relieved while they might be, or would be bur- 
dened (with 7 or γίνηται understood as in ver. 
11) ὁ. 6. that others should not’ be called upon 
while they were burdened with such contri- 
butions. These were probably expressions 
made use of by those who disliked him at Cor- 
inth.— He then declares positively, that the 
principle from which the whole proceeding was 
derived, or the rule by which the whole scheme 
was governed (ἐκ in ver. 11) was, that there 











might be an equality. Of course his aim was te 
adjust an even measure to all. These words 
have been variously construed and punctuated. 
The colon may be placed either after ϑλῖψις, or 
after ἰσότητος; and in either case the subject 
alluded to will be tovro (==7 λογία) γίνεται (1 Cor. 
xvi. 2). According to the second mode of con- 
structing the sentence, iva γίνηται (that there should 
be) must be understood in connection with ἀλλ᾽ 
ἐξ ἰσότητος. Or this whole sentence may be 
joined with what follows, without any words un- 
derstood to complete the sense thus: but accord- 
ing to the law of equality your superabundance 
at this present time may extend (δ. e. γίνεται) to 
their deficiency (Meyer). This construction is 
the easiest, inasmuch as very little needs to be 
supplied to complete the sense. But Osiander 
very correctly remarks that the sentence would 
thereby become much extended (two sentences 
with iva before and after the principal sentence, 
and yet a third would be introduced by an ὅπως 
in connection with ἐξ ἐσότητος) notwithstanding 
its occurrence in the midst of a context more 
than usually lively and sententious. We there- 
fore decide in favor of placing the colon after 
ἰσότητος. The word ἄνεσις probably meant, es- 
pecially in the mind of a murmuring contributor, 
release, loosening from restraint, a careless free- 
dom of enioyment; whereas ϑγῖψις, on the other 
hand, meant that oppression of care which was 
the result of giving beyond their means. ᾿Ισοτῆς 
has not only the sense of equality, but also of 
equity or righteousness. Both significations 
here amount to very much the same thing. The 
point on which the Apostle speaks is not the 
equality between the gift and the ability of the 
giver, but the equality which should prevail 
between the givers and the receivers. The 
contribution should be so adjusted, that it might 
promote a general equality; that each one 
should have what he needed, without a super- 
fluity in one portion of the church and a defi- 
ciency in another, but a communion of Chris- 
tian love.—At the present time your abun- 
dance may extend to their want, that 
their abundance may also extend to 
your want, that there may be equality. 
(ver. 14).—Ev τῷ viv καιρῷ is not to be con- 
nected with what precedes, but it intimates 
that a time might come when the state of 
things would be reversed. It does not apply 
to an earthly in opposition to a heavenly state 
(comp. ver. 14). The words to be under- 
stood must be derived from the leading sen- 


tence, and they should be γίνεται or iva γίνηται, 


signifying: should ve; or, in this place: should 
become, or should amount to. According to 
common usage, γίνεσϑαι εἴς τε would signify 
to become something, or. to arrive at a place, 
and εἰς τινα would signify to fall to one’s 
share (thus Gal. iii. 14). Here the deficiency is, 
as it were, local, and it is to be reached by the 
superfluity. The word éxeivoc applies to the 
same persons as dAAoic. Not only in ver 13, but 
also in ver. 14, the περίσσευμα and ὑστέρημα must 
be understood of earthly possessions (the Catho- 
lies understand them of spiritual blessings). 
Gentile Christians had already been made par- 
takers of the spiritual benefits of the Jews, 
comp. Rom. xy. 27. Nothing but a preconceived 
prejudice could have suggested the idea that 


144 


MES 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ' 


Se Cr ey 


Paul was here attributing to the Jewish Chris- 
tians the performance of works of supereroga- 
tion. With respect to the possibility of such a 
state of things as the Apostle here supposes, 
there is no necessity of referring what he says to 
any event immediately connected with Christ’s 
advent as, e.g., the restoration of Israel, for 
when that event shall take place we can hardly 
imagine that such inequalities of condition will 
exist; but we refer the words rather to those 
catastrophes which were expected on the near 
approach of the Parousia, when such a change 
of circumstances might be possible (comp. Osian- 
der). If we adopt Meyer’s method of constract- 
ing the text, the phrase, that there may be equa- 
lity (ὅπως γένηται ἰσότης) must refer exclusively 
to the member of the sentence which immedi- 
ately precedes it (ἵνα--οὑμῶν ἰσότης, in order that 
if such an event should take place, there might 
be an equality between those who have much 
and those who have little); but if the text be ar- 
ranged according to our construction, it must be 
referred to the two members of the sentence 
which precede it. This principle of equalization 
is illustrated in ver. 15, by a quotation from the 
Scriptural account of the collection of the manna 
in Ex. xvi. 18.—As it is written, He that 
gathered much had nothing over, and 
he that gathered little had no lack.—The 
quotation is from the Sept.; only the position 
of the clauses in the sentence is reversed, and 
συλλέξας is taken from the context of the passage 
there for the completion of the sentence 6 τὸ πολὺ 
—é τὸ ddiyov.’ The meaning is: Every one 
found in the collection what was proportioned 
to his wants; he who had collected much [who had 
the most] had nothing more, and he who had 
collected [they little, had nothing less than what 
he needed. [On the ellipsis and the force of the 
article here, 8. Winer @ 66. 4, and Bence]. God 
had thus given his sanction, when he supplied 
the wants of His people by miracle, to the law 
of equality, viz, that no portion of the people 
was to have a superfluity while another portion 
was destitute. [Worpswortn: ‘By the com- 
mand of God, the manna, which the several 
members of the same tent (συσκήνιοι) had gath- 
ered, was to be put together (Sept.: συνηγμένον, 
συλλελεγμένον) into one common stock, and then 
be meted out with an homer. It was so ordered 
by Almighty God, that when the whole was 











A more striking illustration of a true Christian 
communism could scarcely be found; according 
to which, as Neander suggests, the distinction 
of property is abolished not by violence, but ig 
equalized by the power of love]. 

Vers. 16-24, But thanks be to God who 
is putting the same zeal for you into the 
heart of Titus.—([ Having thus spoken of the 
example of others and of the principle of the 
collection] the Apostle now comes to speak of the 
persons whom he had sent to Corinth on the busi- 
ness of the collection. He first commends (vers, 
16, 17) the zeal of Titus in their behalf, but he 
gratefully gives the honor of awakening this 
zeal in Titus’ heart, to God. The words, the 
same (τὴν αὐτήν) cannot mean the same earnest 
care with that which the Corinthians had felt, 
since ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν shows that they themselves, their 
honor, their welfare, and the advantages which 
would result from such a charity (comp. chap. 
ix. 8 ff.) were the objects of Titus’ activity and 
care. Nor can it mean the same earnest care 
which the objects of their emulation, 7. 6., the 
Macedonian Christians, had exhibited, or the 
saints at Jerusalem might exhibit; for such a 
reference would have required a more distinct 
mention. It only remains therefore that we 
should refer it to the Apostle himself (the same 
earnest care which I have shown). The phrase 
διδόντι ἐν is a concise but significant expression 
(comp. ver. 1). The present participle implies 
that the Divine influence and the consequent zeal 
was continued [and it was ‘‘as though the Apostle 
had before his eyes the working of Titus’ eager- 
ness” Srantey]. The evidence of this zeal is 
given in ver. 17.—For he accepted indeed 
the exhortation; but being himself more 
zealous, he has gone of his own accord 
unto you.—The τὴν παράκλησιν is the exhorta- 
tion which had been mentioned in ver. 6. Having 
spoken of the delicacy and discretion which Ti- 
tus had shown in giving so much time and atten- 
tion to the matter involved in the Apostle’s re- 
quest (τὴν παράκλησιν ἐδέξατο), he is careful to 
notice that Titus’ decision was entirely sponta- 
neous and was not dependent upon his sugges- 
tion. These various aspects of the case are 
brought forward by means of such particles as 
μέν and dé, which are not of the same force as 
ov μόνον----ἀλλὰ καί, since no climax or gradation 
of the thought was intended. Σπουδαιότερος im. 


measured out, each person had exactly an| plies that Titus was too zealous of himself to 


homer, neither more nor less.” 
it to be measured out,” says Turoporet, ‘God 
provided that none should abuse his gift through 
selfishness,” and ‘by turning all superabun- 
dance into worms,” says Jerome, “ἢ showed 
that what God gives, should be for the equal en- 
joyment of all.” Dr. A. Clarke, in his comment 
on Ex. xvi. 18, endeavors to show that each Is- 
raclite collected as much manna when he went 
forth to gather it as he he was able; but that 
on bringing it home and measuring it, if he 
found he had a surplus, he would send it to the 
supply of some larger family which had not 
been able, during the limited time, to collect 
enough, or which might be unable, through sick- 
ness or infirmity, to collect for itself. If, how- 
ever, this distributicn were not made, it could 
not be enjoyed, but it soon turned to corruption. 


ΒΥ ordering | need any suggestion from another. 


| 


[The com- 
parative signifies either, more zealous than the 
Apostle, or more than the Apostle was to prompt 
him, or more than he had been before the sug- 
gestion. Probably the idea was, more zealous 
to engage in the service than 1 to put him upon 
it (Bloomfield)]. Both here and in subsequent 
parts of the Epistle, ἐξῆλθεν is used in the prete- 
rite, aS Was common in a concise style, because 
it anticipated the moment when the Epistle 
should be in the hands of the Corinthians. The 
whole idea intended was the following: Titus 
had not indeed opened his mind to Paul, and he 
had modestly allowed the Apostle to present to 
him the request to undertake this work; and 
yet it was evident that he needed no such request, 
inasmuch as his own free will was already in- 
clined to undertake the affair. He now passes 








CHAP. VIII. 1-24. 


145 





from Titus to those deputies who accompanied 
him. These are not named (vers. 18ff.), but 
they are shown to be persons well adapted to 
their mission. The one first spoken of is desig- 
nated by a reference to some work in which he 
had already been employed—And we sent 
with him the brother whose praise is in 
the Gospel throughout all the churches 
(ver. 18): ob ὁ ἔπαινος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ διὰ πασῶν 
τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν, 7. e., Whose reputation in the promul- 
gation of the Gospel is spread throughout all the 
churches. Hisreputation was universally recog- 
nized wherever churches had been planted. The 
importance of such a commendation was propor- 
tioned to the value one might attach to the opi- 
nion of all these churches; but to give force to 
this, the Apostle subjoins another reason for his 
commendation in connection with the business 
now in hand. This was the confidence which 
the (Macedonian) churches had exhibited when 
they chose him to accompany the Apostle in his 
journey to Jerusalem, with the contributions 
they had made (and not that only, but who 
was also appointed by the churches as 
our fellow traveller with this grace which 
is ministered by us (ver. 19). Instead of 
χειριοτονηϑείς we should naturally have expected 
the accusative. It is to be construed as if the 
Apostle had previously written: who is praised, 
or, not only is he praised, but has also been 
chosen, etc. (ov μόνον de ἐπαινούμενος ἐστιν, ete. 
ἀλλὰ kai—comp. Rom. ix. 10). The choice must 
have been made, either by the overseers of the 
churches on the nomination of the Apostle, or, 
as ὑπὸ τῶν ἐκκλ. rather intimates, by the general 
body of the members themselves when they were 
assembled in their churches, and (as the original 
meaning of the word perhaps implies) showed 
their choice by the uplifting of hands [Osiander 
suggests that the Apostle speaks of the choice of 
the people as though it were the only thing 
essential to the act. It is not an election to a 
permanent office, for these were only ἀπόστολοι 
ἐκκλησιῶν for a temporary purpose, and yet the 
case shows how thoroughly the democratic ele- 
ment pervaded the ecclesiastical life, especially 
in Greece]. The preposition ἐν specifies the ob- 
ject of the proceeding (in this case of the jour- 
ney), in this work of charity, in the management 
of this benevolent enterprise. Although σύν has 
considerable authority in its favor, it is probably 
a gloss; but if it be accepted as genuine, χάρις 
(the grace or charity), in connection with it, 
would signify the money contributed. Διακονεῖν 
is used here as in chap. iii. 3.—For the glory 
of the Lord and the manifestation of our 
zeal. (ver. 1 ).--This clause expresses the object 
they had in view and must not be joined with what 
immediately precedes it; inasmuch as καὶ προϑυ- 
μίαν ἡμῶν (which must here be taken as equivalent 
to: for the showing of our earnestness) would be plain 
enough by itself, and it would therefore seem fee- 
ble. Its proper place seems rather to be in con- 
nection with the main sentence commencing with 
χειροτονηϑείς. It would follow from this choice 
and the codperation of these men that the honor of 
Christ and the inclination of the Apostle (as well 
as of Titus) would be enhanced, inasmuch as the 
burden of cares spoken of in ver. 20, would be light- 
ened and the whole business would be more 
easily accomplished. If we read αὐτοῦ before 








τοῦ κυρίου, the effect will be to make κύριος more 
prominent, in contrast with his instruments.— 
The honor of God would be promoted in propor- 
tion to the degree in which his love was made 
known among the churches and in which he as 
their head inspired them with energy and a 
common active sympathy in this work; and be- 
cause all danger of suspicion with respect to the 
management of the mission would thus we ob- 
viated.— Avoiding this; that no one should 
reproach us in this abundance which ig 
ministered by us (ver. 20).—In this verse he 
makes a more direct reference to such suspiciom 

Στελλόμενοι must be connected with ovverénipauer 
in ver. 18 (not with ver. 19 instead of στελλομεϑα 
yap). In this way ver. 19 forms a parenthesis. 
Στέλλεσϑαι does not signify to depart, as if 
τοῦτο were equivalent to ἐπὶ τοῦτο, but rather, 
to attend to this matter especially. And yet 
such a meaning does not here seem quite ap- 
propriate to the context. It has also the sense 
of: to withdraw one’s self (2 Thess. iii. 6), to 
guard against something, to shun or to avoid it, 
comp. Mal. ii. 5 Sept. (The reading ὑποστελλό- 
μενοι is manifestly a gloss). [The Vulg. is: 
‘* Devitantes hoc,” and Erasmus suggests that the 
word is taken from nautical language, and re- 
fers to the act of sailors when they take in sail 
and turn their course lest they should strike upon 
rocks. Such is the meaning in the only other 
passage where the word is used in the New Tes- 
tament, 2 Thess. iii. 6. Paul about this time was 
making several voyages by sea, and was writing 
toa maritime people. Comp. Acts xx. 20]. Τοῦτο 
is an emphatic word in anticipation of what was 
about to be said. Μωμεῖσϑαι (to reproach) has 
been used before in Chap. vi. 8, and it signifies 
here, the imputation that he had embezzled the 
funds, or that he had been unfaithful to his 
trust in the transaction of his business. ᾿Αδρότης 
presents us the idea of an abundance of the cha- 
ritable contributions (ἀδρός is applied to fruits, 
children, trees, so as to mean that they are ripe, 
large, big; ἁδρὸν πινεῖν is to drink in full 
draughts) not of the χάρις in ver. 19, nor of the 
zeal of those who contributed (Rtickert). Ἔν 
has the sense of: zm, and has reference te the 
object or reason for the reproach. Meyer: in 
puncto. -For we provide for what may be 
honorable not only in the sight of the 
Lord, but also in the sight of man (ver. 
21).—He here gives us the principle by which he 
was guided in this matter (yap makes what fol- 
lows a reason for στελλόμενοι). ἹΤρονοεῖν is equi- 
valent to ἐπεμελεῖσϑαι, and signifies to bear care, 
to be anxious about; it is generally found in the 
middle voice, as in Rom. xii. 17; Prov. 111. 4 
(προνοοῦ καλὰ ἐνώπιον κυρίου καὶ ἀνϑρώπων), & 
passage which the Apostle evidently had before 
his mind when he wrote. The Receptus there- 
fore has προνοούμενοι, a combination of this pas- 
sage and the original reading. In cod. (Ὁ. 
(Tischendorf) we have προνοούμενοι γάρ. Καλά 
signifies honestas, that which is morally beauti- 
ful, noble, honorable. As he took care, to ap- 
pear blameless and becomingly in the sight not 
only of that God before whom he was always 
manifest (Chap. v. 11), but of men, he had 
adopted this precautionary measure.—And we 
have sent with them our brother whom 
we have many times and in many thinga 


140 





have proved diligent but now much more 
diligent for the great confidence he has 
in you (ver. 22).—He here proceeds to com- 
mend the other deputies. He says συνεπέμψαμεν 
αὐτοῖς; and in ver. 18 he had said per’ ἀυτοῦ; 
but both expressions have the same object. In 
ver. 18 the συν in συνεπέμψαμεν cannot refer to 
Timothy (we have sent with another). When he 
says in this place τὸν ἀδελφὸν ἡμῶν he no more 
means a natural brother of his, than in ver. 18, 
natural brother of Titus. In both instances he 
mplies a relationship not merely as Christians 
dut as united in the same office. He represents 
him whom he had sent with Titus and the others, 
as one whom he had often found to be zealous 
in many things but whom he had now found 
much more zealous (than before), inasmuch as his 
great confidence in the Corinthians had intensi- 
fied his earlier zeal.—The various opinions which 
have been advanced with respect to these two 
men are more or less unworthy of confidence. 
Mark, Luke, Epenetus, Trophimus, Apollos, Silas, 
Barnabas* and others have been mentioned as 
each likely to have been one of them. For the 
last three a subordinate position, as associate 
deputies with Titus, would not seem appropriate. 
In favor of Luke is the subscription to our Epis- 
tle, but we know that this has no original au- 
thority. Inbehalf of Mark is sometimes quoted 
the expression, ἐν τῷ evayy. in ver. 18, but a 
written Gospel could not have been here meant. 
W. F. Besser says that ‘this brother must 
have been among the seven companions of Paul 
mentioned in Acts, xx. 4.’’ Both must have been 
introduced to the Corinthians by Titus, in case 
they had been unknown before the reading of 
Paul’s Epistle; and yet the name of the one first 
mentioned had probably been previously known 
to them, since he had been chosen by the Mace- 
donian Churches to take charge of the collec- 
tions.—as to Titus, he is my partner and 
fellow worker toward you; as to our 
brethren, they are the messengers of the 
churches and the glory of Christ (ver. 23). 
—JIn this verse the Apostle commended the three 
brethren collectively. The manner in which he 
speaks of them is here changed: εἶτε ὑπὲρ Τίτου 





{Ὁ Chrysostom speaks decidedly for Barnabas, as the bro- 
th-r mentioned in ver. 18, but we have no evidence that 
he ever travelled with Paul after the separation mentioned 
in Acts xv. 39, and his age and position forbid his subordina- 
tion to the much younger ‘litus. Origen and Jerome give 
us a much more ancient and prevalent tradition in favor of 
Luke. Indeed, probabilities are all in favor of this. The 
use or absence of the pronoun “we” in the Acts indicate 
that Luke was with "aul on his first jonrney throngh Ma- 
cedonia as far as Philippi (Acts xvi. 10,11), but not with 
him again until Paul returned from Troas to Philippi, when 
we find him accompanying Pant in his later travels (Acts 
xx. 5, etc). It seems fair to conclude, therefore, that Luke 
was employed in evangelical labors in Macedonia and 
Greece, and thus acquired a reputation “in the Gospel” 
among the Macedonian Churches. Jerome tells us that 
Luke composed his Gospel “in Achaiae Boeotiaeque parti- 
bus.” Cat. Ser. Ecc. ο. 7). We do not thus assume that 
Paul had necessarily any reference to a written Gospel in 
our passage. Wordsworth’s idea that Panl had by inspira- 
tion a proleptic reference to the future celebrity of Luke’s 
written Gospel seems to us unworthy of serious defence. If 
all reference to a written Gospel be removed, we have no 
occasion to think of Mark, who was not probably Paul's 
companion after his separation from Barnabas. We never 
read of Apollos as under Paul’s direction or influence after 
Acts xix.1. Beyond Titus and Luke, then, we have no 
Means of determining with any probability who among 
Paul's company (Acts xx. 4) were these deputies). 


" 








7 ee 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
-- τ τ ΞΕ ΘΟ 


—eite ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν. Whether I speak in behalf 
of Titus, he is, ede.; whether our brethren be 
spoken of (εἰσίν ὑπὲρ dv λέγω), they are, etc. The 
intercession in favor of Titus was justified by 
the intimate relation in which he stood to the 
Apostle himself: he is my companion (in oflice); 
but particularly by the intimate relation in 
which he thus stood to the Corinthians: he is 
with respect to you my fellow-laborer (chap. 
vii. 7). That they were bound to hold the other 
two in high esteem, he shows by adverting to 
the fact that they were the messengers of the 
(Macedonian) Churches, and were to be hon- 
ored therefore in proportion to the honor 
which such representatives deserve. [ Alford’s im- 
putation (Sunday Mag., May, 1864) that the trans- 
lators of our English version had some private 
reasons for rendering ‘‘azéoroAo.”’ by the word 
‘“‘messengers,” is not very clear. Even ‘the 
more general sense” of the word to which he re- 
fers as including apostolic men is not demanded 
here, for the persons are mentioned, not as sent 
of the Lord in any sense, but simply as ἀπόστολοι 
ἐκκλησιῶν, with reference to a single benevolent 
mission or journey. It can surely have no re- 
ference here to ἃ permanent office, and is used 
simply as a common noun, as in the instances to 
which he refers beside our passage (Phil. ii. 25, 
and Acts xiv. 14; comp. with Acts xiii. 2)]. In- 
deed, their relation to Christ Himself was suffi- 
cient to entitle them to respect, for they were an 
honor to Christ (by their influence and probably 
by their daily life) inasmuch as Christ’s love and 
power were manifested in them and by their 
means (comp. δόξα in 1 Cor. xi. 7). [CALvin: 
—Whoever excels in piety is the glory of Christ, 
because he has nothing which is not Christ’s gift. ] 
Having thus introduced ver. 23 without a con- 
junction (for οὖν is not genuine), be proceeds 
with an οὖν to derive a practical inference from 
his commendation of the three brethren, or (more 
correctly) of the two last as ἀποστ. τῶν ἐκκλ.---- 
since ye show toward them the proof of 
your love, and of our boasting on your be- 
half, ye will show it before the churches 
(ver. 24).—The sentence, τὴν οὖν ἐνδειξιν---ἐνδεικ- 
νύμενοι (a way of speaking which may be found 
in Plato), stands in need of some verb to supply 
the ellipsis, and this may be either in the imper- 
ative, or (better) in the indicative (present or 
future) of the same verb: ‘‘since ye give to them 
the evidence of your love, and of our boasting in 
your behalf, ye thus show it, or ye will show it, 
in the face of the churches. Even if the future 
tense is preferred, an indirect exhortation is 
implied. [If the part. ἐνδεικνύμενοι is construed 
as an imperative, as Alford and Stanley contend 

it frequently may be in St. Paul (Rom. xii. 9-19; 
Eph. iii. 18; Col. iii. 16), the English rendering 
of the passage will be the same as if the reading 
were that of the Recep. Meyer thinks that this 
throws the emphasis upon εἰς tpécwrov τῶν EKKA, 
more strongly than is required by the context, 
and that an indirect admonition, representing 
the thing as an affair of honor, but without mak- 
ing a formal demand, was more forcible: ‘since 
ye therefore will give a demonstration to them 
of your love, and that which we have boasted of 
you, ye do it, ete. Inthis way εἰς αὐτούς and εἰς 
πρόσωπον τ. ékkA. correspond with respect to em« 


CHAP. VIII. 1-24. 


147 


a lt 


phasis, and after the part. ἐνδείκν. we have sup- 
plied the second person of the present Indicative 
of the same verb]. Εἰς πρόσωπον, if the Indica- 
tive is used, will signify, im conspectu, presented 
to the face, or since the churches are looking 
upon you, this proof of affection will be seen by 
them; if the Imperative is preferred, that phrase 
will be equivalent to: εἰς τὰς ἐκκλησίας, and will 
mean towards the churches personally present, 
i. e., you should, or will give this proof to the 
churches themselves in the person of those rep- 
resentatives of whom I have just spoken (ἀπόςτ. 
τῶν ἐκκλ.). The last is preferable. NEANDER: 
—‘‘So that the Macedonian Churches may per- 
ceive that what Paul had said in praise of the 
Corinthians was true.’”’ ᾿Αγάπη here means their 
love, not merely to Paul, but to the brethren 
generally. On καύχησις ἡμῶν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν comp. 
chap. vii. 14 (chap. v. 12; ix. 8). Ἑἰς αὐτους is 
to be construed with ἐνδεικνύμενοι, and has εἰς 
πρόσωπον τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν for its correlative. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. The profoundest inducement Christians can 
have for denying themselves to assist their fel- 
low-men, is derived from the example of the Son 
of God when He gave up all things and became 
poor that we might become rich by His poverty. 
We were completely destitute of spiritual good, 
and altogether unable to extricate ourselves from 
our poverty. In His equality with God He was 
infinitely blessed and glorious in the possession 
of spiritual riches. But so completely did He 
renounce all this, and enter into the absolute 
poverty of sinful beings, that He was dependent 
upon others and was obliged to pray the Father 
through the Spirit which was given Him, for 
light, strength, courage, consolation, refresh- 
ment and whatever He needed each moment of 
his earthly career. This was entirely for our 
sakes, for no necessity of His own required it. 
It was to recover for us those spiritual posses- 
sions which we had lost by aspiring to inde- 
pendence. And now since His self-sacrifice, as 
our Head and Surety, has recovered them, we 
have a rich abundance to use as if it were our 
own. All who will honestly forsake the sins 
which occasioned our loss and made us unworthy 
of riches, all who will confidingly surrender 
themselves to Jesus, the source of their wealth, 
shall be put in full possession of this. But those 
who know this act of grace and consider how 
great it was and how vast are the benefits which 
condemned sinners have derived from it, will 
cheerfully deay themselves in like manner; the 
joy they feel in the possession of such a salva- 
tion will open their hearts to communicate freely 
to those whom Jesus regards as His brethren, 
that they may thus make some return of joy to 
Him who gave himself for us. Nothing they can 
do will be looked upon as too much, or enough, as 
a token of their grateful remembrance. The 
greatest favor they can ask will be, to be al- 
lowed to participate in the common work of be- 
neficence. No one will find it needful to plead 
long for their assistance, and when they contri- 
bute to a great work, they will first give their 
own selves and make no nice calculations as to 
their own ability. They will be ready to go be- 


yond their power and deprive themselves of or- 
dinary comforts, when another’s greater neces- 
sity seems to require it. 

2. In the department of Christian fellowship, 
there must be a consciousness of equality, for all 
are as sinners, poor; and, as God’s children, rich. 
This equality in spiritual things would be dis- 
turbed by a great inequality in worldly posses- 
sions, if one brother exalted himself above an- 
other and if the latter brother should to the same 
extent depreciate himself or become envious of 
his favored neighbor. But where the spirit of 
Christ prevails those who possess much will 
strive to equalize this matter, for they will allow 
none to be in want. By a simple style of living 
they will secure the means of helping those who 
need assistance. This may be so done that the 
recipients will not feel that they are receiving an 
alms, but an act of grateful love to Christ which 
finds its own satisfaction in ministering to his 
brethren. It will be much easier to do this if 
these recipients indulge in no spirit of envy for 
what God has bestowed upon their more favored 
brethren, and accept of the gift in the same sim- 
plicity with which it is given. It came from the 
infinite riches of their divine Master but through 
such hands and by such instruments as were cal- 
culated to strengthen the bonds of love and fel- 
lowship. 

[8. ‘*The sacred writers constantly recognize 
the fact that the freest and most spontaneous 
acts of men, their inward states and the outward 
manifestations of those states when good are due 
to a secret influence of the Spirit of God which 
eludes our consciousness. The believer is most 
truly self-determined when determined by the 
grace of God. The liberality of the Corinthians 
was due to the operation of the grace of God.” 
“The zeal of Titus was the spontaneous effusion 
of his own heart and was an index and element 
of his character, and yet God put that zeal into 
his heart. So congenial and congruous is divine 
influence, that the life of God in us is in the 
highest sense our own life.” Hopes. 

4. A high excellence in one or more graces of 
the Christian character only makes more start- 
ling a serious deficiency in others (ver. 7). To 
have great knowledge of divine truth, and a free 
utterance as to duties and privileges, only ex- 
poses our inconsistency, when we lack practical 
benevolence. And it is one great aim of divine 
and pastoral discipline, to effect this complete- 
ness of character in all believers. Afilictions are 
sent by God (ver. 1), and opportunities and ex- 
amples will be used by a skilful pastor, so as to 
prove (ver. 8) and to draw forth all graces in 
their season. Ἷ 

5. We have here a true system of Christian 
socialism. In the divine kingdom the Liberty of 
each citizen is so perfect, that its rulers and the 
Sovereign King himself will receive nothing from 
compulsion or by the dictation of authority ; the 
Fraternity of all citizens is secured by a recogni- 
tion of each believer and especially of each suf- 
fering believer as a brother of our Lord, and the 
sympathy of each Christian with his fellow 
Christians is the measure of his love to Christ; 
and universal Lguality, not in outward circum, 
stances which would be delusive, undesirable and 
impossible, but in the common poverty from 


148 





which all are rescued and the common riches 
whicharetheinalienable birthright of every one. 
Each one has his peculiar capacity of enjoyment, 
beyond which he can enjoy nothing, whatever he 
may have in possession, and short of which he 
has a claim upon our assistance. The rights and 
duties of each individual may not be precisely 
defined by outward law, but the love of Christ 
and the Spirit of Christ universally diffused, will 
secure an equality, in which the rich bestow 
freely as much as the poor and suffering are wil- 
ling to receive. Such an equality springs from 
‘«the feeling of a true and loving brotherhood ; 
which makes each man say: My superabund- 
ance is not mine, it is another’s: not to be taken 
by force, or wrung from me by law, but given 
freely by the law of love.” F. W. Roperrtson. 

6. Lhe whole system of mendicancy, which 
has been derived from this chapter by ancient 
and modern ascetics (v. especially Estius), has 
really no support. Not a word can be found 
there implying, ‘‘that the less sanctified believer 
can derive assistance, even in another world, 
from the merits of the saints,” or that there is 
“such a virtue in almsgiving as to make the 
giver a participator in the merits of the re- 
ceiver, (vv. 9, 14). Christ became poor not be- 
cause poverty was in itself more meritorious than 
riches, but because it was the only condition in 
which He could reach the special object He had 
in view. Nor did He ever become strictly a 
mendicant. The evils of poverty and self-sacri- 
fice were never chosen for any virtue He saw in 
them for their own sake. No outward condi- 
tion, separate from the motive with which it is 
sought and the spirit in which it is endured was 
desirable to Him. The whole history of mendi- 
eant orders is a striking illustration not of the 
“higher perfection” of voluntary poverty, but 
of the injurious influence of such a state when 
chosen from self-righteous and unspiritual mo- 
tives. And yet poverty and self-sacrifice are 
noble, when they are encountered for a noble 
object, or as a necessary discipline of provi- 
dence, and are sustained in a Christian spirit. 

7. The Apostolic system of charitable collec- 
tions is admirably developed in this and the fol- 
lowing section. The Duty of giving was pressed 
upon every Christian with earnestness and im- 
portunity. It was evidently no unimportant part 
of the church’s care. It was extensively used as 
a test of character and a means of usefulness and 
fellowship. The Motives, by which it was urged, 
were love to men as men, to Christians as breth- 
ren in Christ, and to Christ Himself. But al- 
though in the Collec/ion of contributions, this 
duty and these motives were pressed with all 
the art and urgency of the most ardent beneyo- 
Jence, every one was scrupulously left to make 
his gift a token of his own conscientious convic- 
tion and affection. ‘There are several higher 
degrees of the acts of charity and other Chris- 
tian virtues that are not in precepto, and may be 
omitted without sinning, vet are in consilio; and 
the performance of them most highly acceptable 
to God” (Oxford old Paraphrase on ver. 10.). 
We ought indeed to do for Christ all which is in 
our power and hence we can never exceed the 
measure of duty, but yet neither Christ nor his 
apostles would force by authority the higher to- 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








kens of our affection which derive all their pre- 
ciousness from their freedom. In the persong 
selected for manaying and disbursing these collec- 
tions the utmost wisdom and the best characters 
were put in requisition. It is plain that if giv- 
ing is an admirable test of a Christian’s benevo- 
lence, the management of charitable funds is one 
of the severest tests of hisintegrity anddiseretion. 
8. ‘God’s government is an equal and just 
and good government (ver. 12). What can be 
more equitable than the principle that a man is 
accepted according to what he has?” Barngs.] 





HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


SrarKe:—Ver. 1. We should copy after the 
good examples of our fellow Christians, for one 
reason why our Lord would have His people do 
good works, is that others may have the benefit 
of their light, and that God may be glorified 
(Matth. v. 16). When our hearts burn with 
Christian love, and we are prepared to assist 
those who need our aid, it is the special gift of 
God.—Srener:—Not only he who receives, but 
far more he who confers a favor is blessed, for 
what can be a greater benefit than to be filled 
with love, and to have the power to do good 
(Acts xx. 85).—VeER. 2. Hepincrr:—Much tri- 
bulation, much joy! The Lord lays on us 
crosses, but fills us with pleasures. The faith 
of the pious poor works by love, and opens their 
hands to give cheerfully what they have. The 
three main elements in real goodness, are: to 
give cheerfully, without being importuned ; libe- 
rally, according to ability; and sincerely, with- 
out a selfish motive (chap. xii. 8; ix. 7; Tobit 
iv. 9; Rom, xii. 8).—Ver. 3. It may sometimes 
be a Christian’s duty to give alms to his own 
suffering. Even if you have no more than your 
neighbor, if his distress is greater, and your re- 
lief is speedier, easier and surer, you ought im- 
mediately to help him. Hxrpinger:—Though 
poor, yet rich! rich to give, rich to bless. 
Others lay up much; and it proves only as the 
foam of a boiling vessel. Grudge not the sweat 
of thy brow !—Ver. 5. To give nothing but your- 
self when collections are made for the poor, 
proves that thou neither knowest God, nor doest 
His will (1 Jno. iii. 17).— Ver. 6. A good work 
in one place*should encourage the hope that it 
will stir up a similar activity in another place. 
Every Christian needs to be stimulated to bene- 
volence, for the best will sometimes become dull. 
—Ver. 7. Faith and God’s Word are as insepa~ 
rable as food and health, and bodily strength. 
The only sure evidence that our knowledge of 
God and of Divine things is correct, must be in 
the fact that God’s Word is our standard, faith 
its medium, and practical beneficence its fruit. 
-- ον. 8. God Himself condescended to minister 
to the poor, and His people should be enjoined 
to do the same, but to what objects, at what 
time, or how much they shall give, must be left to 
every one’s conscience. One of the first objects 
of a good minister should be to induce every one 
to perform his duty, but from his own free will, 
and from evangelical motives. God’s people are 
not left entirely to their own freedom with re- 
spect to doing good. It is a matter of command 
that they must love their fellow men, and they 


CHAP. VIII. 1-24. 


149 





are enjoined to love in the only way in which 
true love can exist.—Ver. 9. Hepincer:—Christ 
became poor to make others rich. Many become 
rich by making others poor. 
have the Spirit of Christ.—Ver. 10f. We are 
never the poorer for the giving of alms. Be not 
weary in well doing, when God bids thee on.— 
Ver. 12. If Christians have but little to give, 
even that little will be acceptable to God; a 
loving God will be pleased with little, even if it 
be but a cup of water, Matth. x. 42.—Ver. 13. 
Hepincer:—Christ’s command is not that beg- 
gars should be rich, and the rich beggars; nor 
that one should have every thing while his bro- 
ther has nothing. Love can impart, but it can- 
not receive too much. The rich and the poor 
should live together, that they may serve each 
other; but especially when famine threatens, lest 
the poor should perish. Thank God, there are 
always some kind and faithful ones who are 
ready to give help, and are bountiful to the 
poor, sometimes even to their own apparent 
loss.—Ver. 17. Follow no man blindly. God’s 
Spirit in thine own heart will be thy guide. A 
willing heart will always please Him.—Ver. 18f. 
None but well tried and honest men, who walk 
honestly before God and men, not merely those 
who have a fair show and a glib tongue, are fit 
to have the control of our charities. Better 
than every thing else is, a good name for faith 
and the fear of God. If others praise us, we 
should never be lifted up, but let it pass, and 
be stimulated to greater goodness.—Ver. 20f. 
Hepincer:—Avoid not only the reality, but 
even the appearance of evil! Strive to have an 
honorable name as well as a good conscience; 
thy neighbor demands that, God this.—Ver. 22. 
In matters of importance we cannot watch our- 
selves too carefully. In pecuniary affairs we 
should be so especially circumspect, that malice 
itself can find no occasion to reproach us. Men 
who have been tried and have passed through 
great varieties of experience, should be held in 
great esteem, for they can be profitably employed 
in almost any station.—Ver. 23. Those who are 
employed in the same church are partners and 
brethren, but even the most exalted and most 
accomplished should never despise their fellows. 

Berens. Brsie:—The church consists of many 
members who are bound to assist one another, 
according to their ability and wants. God has 
left the actual performance of this duty almost 
entirely to every one’s free will; He actually re- 
quires it, but in such a way as best to exercise 
our faith and love. This is especially true of 
the care of the poor.—Ver. 1. The obedience 
which grace produces, is especially cheerful and 
free from mercenary views. It will always be 
the fruit of a genuine conversion. Opportuni- 
ties for it will seem to a Christian a personal 
favor from the Giver of all good (James i. 17).— 
Ver. 2. In urging the example of others we 
should guard against a servile imitation. We 
should be careful to present not merely the out- 
ward action, but the true spirit and idea of it — 
It is astonishing how much good may be con- 
cealed under a little suffering. It is altogether 
beyond the sight of the thorough man of the 
world, who is unworthy of it; but such suffering 
only clarifies the spiritual man’s eye to recognize 


Can such persons’ 











the wonders of the cross. None but the spiritua} 
man can know what it is to rejoice and to suffer 
at the same moment. In these very troubles, 
which give no pleasure, and are ominous, only 
of destruction to the flesh, the spiritual Chris- 
tian not unfrequently finds nothing but joy (Jas. 
i. 2; Rom. νυ. 8). A covetous man is poor even 
in his riches, for he is the slave of his own pos- 
sessions, and can make no profitable use of them, 
either for himself or others. A poor man, living 
in simplicity, is rich, for he is satisfied with 
what he has, and can share even a little with a 
neighbor. Thisis a delight to him, for all he 
has is sweetened by the Divine hand from which 
he receives it. The ancients used to say that 
“the angels rejoiced when one poor man did a 
kindness to another,”’—Ver. 8. The works of the 
Spirit must be spontaneous and unconstrained 
by authority.—-Ver. 5. Those are truly good works 
which are the fruit of an entire consecration 
of soulto God. The alms which are of this na- 
ture, are therefore called charitable offerings, 
because they are entirely surrendered to God’s 
hands. It is something for a man to give what 
he possesses to God or for God’s sake. But far 
more is it for him to give up his entire self as a 
living sacrifice to God. There may be men who 
condemn it, but in the sight of God it is of great 
price. Though men may condemn it, is of much 
value.—Ver. 6. The true apostolic spirit presses 
on toward perfection in every thing. The word 
grace shows: 1, that we are by nature covetous, 
and would never perform acts of goodness with- 
out Divine grace; and 2, that what we give is 
ours only by free grace.—Ver. 7. We cannot ac- 
cept of one part of Christianity without another. ἡ 
When we commend any thing in it, we must ex- 
cept nothing in connection with it.—Ver. 8. No 
man must be forced to give in charity, but there 
is no man who does not need sometimes to be ad- 
monished and stimulated to give of his own free 
act.—Ver. 9. If we know aright the grace which 
had compassion on us, we shall proportionately 
know the grace which sanctifies us; for such 
love will fill us with shame, and draw us to true 
repentance, and to a corresponding love and 
duty. Howcan a knowledge of such amazing 
love fail to awaken within us a similar spirit of 
self-sacrifice? The Christian, as such, with 
nothing but Christ is rich.—Ver. 10f. It is no 
easy thing to admonish a brother well. Much 
wisdom and skill are needful to select and pre- 
sent those motives which are likely to produce 
the best result. Good works which are merely 
external and forced, differ essentially from those 
which spring from evangelical principles, and 
come spontaneously from the heart. Those who 
know what it is to work, are the ones to have 
something for the needy (Eph. iv. 28).—Ver. 12. 
Where love is in the heart it will do nothing 
without consideration, and its gifts will be ac- 
cepted by God and His people with pleasure. 
The Gospel demands only what has been re- 
ceived.—Ver. ]3ff. We must help those who are 
in distress now, for our turn may soon come. 
Such a stroke is not unfrequently needful to 
drive indolent slumbers even from the believer’s 
heart. God allows men to live side by side, some 
with superfluities and others in want, that they 
may be bound together by offices of mutual kind- 


159 


— 





ness.—Ver. 16. Fix not your ey” ‘ntirely upon ) 
the instruments, but look beysp% *v the God who 
gives all things, and thank Pim.—Ver. 13. It is 
essential to Christianity the’, eal its places should 
be arranged with carefu( ‘oresight and creer. It 
should provide especially that its ministers 
should be pure snd blameless before men, and 
avoid everything which might awaken suspicion. 
—Ver. 22. Every form of goodness, even such 
virtues as diligence, zeal and watchfulness, must 
be encouraged and thrive under the influence of 
Christianity. —Ver. 23. Every Christian might 
be a glory to Christ, if he would have Christ 
formed within his heart, and would honor Christ 
especially in works of charity. —Ver. 24. We 
should do it for the glory of God, and for the 
awakening of our fellow men. 

Riecer:—Ve_er. lff. Divine grace is always 
in the heart when we are inclined to acts of cha- 
rity, and those who thankfully enjoy the gift 
will not forget the Divine Giver.—Our own 
wants, and perilous times will often be an excuse 
for neglecting works of kindness, but God’s word 
reverses this, and makes them a motive for ac- 
tivity in them. Let any man become aware by 
experience of the little comfort which earthly 
things can give, and of the mighty aid which 
grace can give under every variety of condition 
from sources he never dreamed of, and he will 
never settle down under the pretence of holding 
together what he has, but will let it go to the 
relief of others, and with heartfelt simplicity 
commit himself to the wonderful care of God.— 
Ver. 4. The name of saint, is always a sufficient 
motive to give liberally and cheerfully.—Ver. 9. 
The whole earthly life of our Saviour was as 
lowly as it was different from everything which 
the world loves. And yet at every step He was 
cheered by the tokens of His heavenly Father’s 
love (Matth. iv. 4). He thus showed that there 
are better treasures than can be found on earth; 
that we can be rich in God, but poor on earth; 
that one miy have every bond which binds him 
to this world sundered and yet be rich toward 
God, ani that our highest nobility consists in a 
title to a Divine inheritance.—Ver. 10ff. Every- 
thing we hase should be looked upon as com- 
mitted to us in trust that we may give to those 
who need it. Why should not the profitless 
penny laid up for a wet day be invested in the 
Lord’s fund (Prov. xix. 19) ?—Ver. 14f. In an 
unfallen state when men loved God and one an- 
other with a pure heart, God’s gifts were enjoyed 
by all creatures alike. But since man has fallen 
and mutual envies and wrongs make it need- 
ful that each one should have his peculiar 
possessions and rights of property, great inequa- 
lities have been produced by the right of inheri- 
tance and other arbitrary arrangements. And 
though the mingling of the rich and the poor in 
common society has been overruled for many 
advantages, we should strive to prevent great in- 
equalities in human condition, and by offices of 
mutual love equalize as much as possible the 
bounties of Providence.—How happy would it 
be, if every man would regard and use his earthly 
goods as the Israelites did their manna, rather 
as a Divine gift than as a product of human toil, 
for the supply of his absolute wants rather than 
for the indulgence of his passions, and for con- 








THE SECOND FP’STLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





sumption along his journey rather than for ἃ 
permanent accumulation!—Ver. 21. O God, give 
me an honest heart, a pervading desire to per- 
form every duty under the direction not merely 
of some prescriptive forms and outward letter, 
but of an enlightened conscience, and as nearl 
as possible according to that image of love whith 
belonged originally to man, and which is renewed 
by grace in his heart! 

HrvuBNneR:—Ver. 2. Persecutions and crosses 
give life to the church. They impart to us that 
firmness and courage which are so indispensable 
to offices of fellowship and charity. Melancholy 
and gloom on the other hand contract the heart. 
—Ver. 3f. Christian love regards the gifts which 
it bestows, as of small consequence compared 
with the spiritual benefit it derives from the ob- 
jects of its bounty. Hence it ‘“‘ prays with much 
entreaty.”—Ver. 5. True love when it gives, 
gives as it were its whole self.—Ver. 7. The 
richer one is in moral excellence, the nobler 
should he appear in kind consideration for all 
around him. Penuriousness and selfishness 
would bedim all his virtues, as rust will destroy 
the lustre of the most brilliant metal. Where 
real benevolence is wanting among a people, 
there can be no true life.—Ver. 8. Example is 
far more effective than precept, and every work 
of love should stimulate to something higher.— 
Ver. 10. The tenderer a Christian’s heart is the 
freer his soul should be; he needs the less your 
commands, and only hints and opportunities. 
Precise precepts are for children, but a freer 
choice is better for the mature youth. We have 
aright to expect that a congregation of Chris- 
tians will be of a mature age.—Ver. 11. The 
good purpose should never waver when we come 
to the performance. To fail in doing is espe- 
cially disgraceful to him who has willed it.— 
Ver. 12. Love is never so unreasonable as to 
demand what is impossible, but neither will it 
refuse compliance from some apprehension of a 
remote and only possible danger.—Ver. 138ff. 
The inequalities which God permits should be 
adjusted only in His own way. True charity is 
a practical recognition of man’s equality. But 
where inequalities exist, as they will, we should 
never murmur against God, even when they burn 
with indignation against the oppressor.—Our 
highest enjoyment of life depends not upon the 
possession of an abundance; a very moderate 
portion is enough.—Ver. 20f. Even those who 
are conscious of moral purity, should never be 
indifferent to that which might draw upon them 
the suspicions of their fellowmen, but strive to 
maintain an untarnished reputation before the 
world. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 1. ‘To do good and to 
communicate” are of grace (Heb. xiii. 16), This 
idea stands at the head of all that the Apostle 
says in this section, and he thus closes the door 
against all foolish fancies about human merit. 
Every blossom of the tree of life is thus pro- 
tected against the poisonous blight of self-righ- 
teousness.—Ver. 2. This gracious source from 
which the stream of charity flows to the world 
is also a source of joy to the heart.—Ver. 8f. 
Seldom do we meet with those who‘ give accord. 
ing to their ability: for we seldom find those 
who calculate with simplicity what their ability 


vy 


CHAP. IX. 1:16: 


151 


== --------΄ς-ς--------- --ς-ς-ςς-.-ο--- ---ς---ςς----- ὃ. 


is; but still more uncommon are those who give 
beyond their power, for very uncommon is that 
love which seeks not its own, which cheerfully 
bears its own wants, and which ther fore can 
spare anything from its means of self-gratifica- 
tion.—Ver. 9. May each of us have the mind 
which was also in Christ Jesus (Phil. ii. 9)! 
Our Lord’s grace in becoming poor is set before 
us that we may imitate Him.—The Scriptures 
never speak of voluntary poverty as a merit, 
but they rather commend that voluntary service 
in which a man uses what he has and of course 
ought to have, as though he possessed it not (1 
Cor. vii. 30).—Ver. 10f. There is such a thing 
as the outward performance without the hearty 
willing of an act of charity especially among 
those who have an abundance. They may give 
from a sudden excitement of sympathy, from the 
example of the multitude, or from the necessity 
of their position.—Ver. 12. Even the widow’s 
mite (Mark xii. 43) should not be kept back from 
God’s treasury. If there be a willing mind it is 
acceptable to God and will be estimated in each 
case according to what it has, and not according 
to what it has not. God’s pleasure in the free 
offerings of his people is not proportioned to the 
extent of their possessions, for some of them have 
small possessions but large hearts. In such 
cases the willing among the rich would be more 
acceptable than the willing among the poor. 
“‘In God’s sight,” says GREGORY THE GREAT, ‘‘no 
man’s hand is without a gift who has a treasury 
of goodelesires in his heart.’’-—Christ’s example 
should be imitated by doing, not what its out- 
ward form might seem to require, but what 
Christ’s Spirit taught His disciples (John xiii. 
15).=/4%r. 13f. The system of communism and 
sociaiim which some have devised are only ser- 
vile imitations of the true fellowship of the saints, 
and wherever they have been carried out there 
are no traces of that equality which Christian 
love produces. Asa stream by its own law, must 
necessarily descend, so the essential spirit of 
Christian love inclines the heart of the rich to- 
ward them whgare in want. Those inequalities 
of social life, im which the rich and the poor 
must dwell together, give employment to the love 
of the members of the Christian household, as 
they endeavor to equalize the comforts of all and 
to give enough to all. To this extent the com- 





munity of goods among the first Christians is an 
authoritative example for all subsequent ages.— 
Ver. 15. The wonderful arrangement which the 
heavenly Householder ordained for His great fa- 
mily in the wilderness, should be affectionately 
imitated by His stewards upon earth, that there 
may be no inequalities in tre house of God. As 
the manna which was carefully kept in store, 
was soon filled with worms, so the superfluous 
abundance which is kept back from the supply 
of a brother’s wants will have no blessing.—Ver. 
19. Those who would banish from the church all 
such things as a choice of spiritual officers, on 
the ground that they are too secular and legal, 
may have a great appearance of spirituality, but 
the Scriptures know nothing of a spiritualism 
which proudly exalts itself above all external 
and necessary order, generally to introduce ty- 
ranny instead of love, and finally to degrade the 
body of the church to a machine in the hands of 
a few. 

[Christian beneficence: I. Its proper incen- 
tives. 1. It is an indication of divine grace 
(ver. 1). 2. It has an admirable example com- 
mended by the Apostle himself. The Macedoni- 
ans gave without solicitation (ver. 3), to breth- 
ren in some respects opposed to them, (Jewish 
Christians), when tried by deep poverty (ver. 2) 
and yet up to and beyond their power (ver. 3), 
with overflowing joy (ver. 2), without an over- 
valuation of what they did (ver. 4), and with 
a complete surrender of themselves (ver. 5). 3. 
It is like Christ (ver. 9), who, unlike the Mace- 
donians, was rich, but gave Himself and all His 
wealth to enrich guilty men. 4. It is needful to 
our own consistency, for a clear faith, and much 
knowledge and power (ver. 7), a sincere love 
(ver. 8), and an already announced purpose (ver. 
10), should be carried out into benevolent action. 
5. It is needful to an equal distribution’of pro- 
vidential favors (vv. 13-15). II. Its needful 
precautions. Not to present before men a false 
show of goodness nor to silence vain talkers, but, 
1. Against giving from wrong motives, as under 
authority (ver. 8), and without inward convic- 
tion (ver. 12) 2. Against intrusting the work 
to weak or dishonest men (vv. 18-24). 3. 
Against plausible objectors (ver. 21). 4. Against 
unequal burdens (ver. 18). 


XIV.—ADMONITION TO GIVE SPEEDILY, ABUNDANTLY AND CHEERFULLY; THE DtI- 
VINE BLESSING UPON THEM AND THE RESULT OF THE THANKSGIVINGS 
WHICH WOULD FOuLOW. THANKSGIVING. 


CuapTer IX. 1-15. 


For [indeed, μὲν] as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for me 

2 to write to you: For I know the forwardness of your mind, for which I boast of you 
to them of Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a year ago [from last year, ἀπὸ πέρυσι]; 
and your zeal [the zeal which proceedeth from you, ὁ ἐξ ὁμῶν ζῆλος 7; hath provoked 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








3 very many [the majority, τοὺς πλείονας]. Yet have I sent the brethren, lest our boast-- 


4 ing of you should be in vain in this behalf; that, as I said, ye may be ready: Lest 
haply if they of Macedonia [any Macedonians, Maxeddvec] come with me, and find you 


unprepared, we (that we say* not, ye) should be ashamed in this same confident boast-— 


5 ing [with respect to this confidence].* Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the 
brethren, that they would go before unto* you, and make up beforehand your bounty, 
whereof ye had notice before, [which I have before announced, προεπηγγελμένην " 
that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not as° of coyetousness. 

6 But this J say [as to this], He which soweth s. aringly shall reap also sparingly; and he 
which soweth bountifully [with blessings, ἐπ᾿ εὐλυγέαις} shall reap also bountifully [with 

7 blessings]. Every man according as he pur; oseth [hath purposed. προΐρηται])" in his 
heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful 

8 giver. And [But, δὲ] God is able’ to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always 
having [having always] all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work: 

9 (As it is written, He hath dispersed abroad; he hath given to the poor: his right- 

Ὁ eousness remaineth forever. Now [But, δὲ] he that ministereth seea® to the sower 
both minister bread for your food [supplieth seed to the sower and bread to the eating, 
will supply], and multiply your seed sown, and increase® the fruits of your righteous- 

11 ness:) Being enriched in everything to all bountifulness [simplicity, ἁπλότητα], which 

12 causeth through us thanksgiving to Goi.” For [Because, ὅτε] the administration of 

this service not only supplieth the want of the saints, but is abundant also by many 

13 thanksgivings unto God; While by the experiment of this ministration they glorify 

God for your professed subjection [since they vlorify God on account of the proof 

which this ministration gives of the subjection which flows from your confession] unto 

the gospel of Christ and for your liberal distribution [the simplicity of your commu- 

14 nion, ἁπλότητι τῆς χοινωνέίας] unto them and unto all men; aud by their prayer for you, 

which long after you for [with prayer also for you, as they long after you on account 

15 of] the exceeding grace of God in you. Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable 

gift. 

1 Ver. 2.—In some good MSS. [B. C. Sin. Vulg. Syr. ef al. and some Lat. fathers] ἐξ is wanting before ὑμῶν. (‘#7eemed 
act and was not understood. [Tisch. (7th ed.) inserts it, but Lachm. and Stanley omit it, and Alford wits it in 
brackets. ~ 

2 Ver. 4.—Some important but not sufficient authorities have λέγω instead of λέγωμεν. 

8 Ver. 4.—Kec. after ταύτῃ adds τῆς καυχήσεως, but the words are an explanatory gloss and in opposition to the best 
MSS. [B. C. Ὁ. (Ist Cor.) F. G. Sin. (3d Cor. has it), several cursives, with the Ital. Vulg. and Copt. versions. They are can- 
celled by Lachm., Tisch. and Alford, but Bloomfield thinks they cannot be dispensed with either here or in Chap. xi. 17. 

# Ver. 5.—The predominance of authorities are for πρὸς, though the Rec. has eis {And yet Tisch. and Alford retain 
eis, and are sustained by C. Καὶ. L.Sin.and some Greek fathers.] Rec alsu has προκατηγγελμένην instead of the much better 
sustained προεπηγγελμένην. 

5 Ver. 5.—Rec. has ὥσπερ for the second ὡς, but its evidence is feeble. 

δ Ver. 7.—Lachm. after B. C. F.G. (Sin.] εἰ al. has προήρηται instead of Rec. προαιρεῖται. It was probably a correc 
tion, because the preter. seemed more appropriate (Meyer). |It is not surprising that the subsequent addition of Cod. Sin. 
should have determined the more recent critics in favor of Lachmann’s reading. | 

7 Ver. 8.—Lachm. has évvaret with important MSS.: but if this had been the original reading a gloss would have 
naturally changed it into δυνατὸς ἐστιν or δύναται. [Alford still prefers δυνατεῖ, and sees no force in the above sugges- 
tion. The authority of B.C. Ὁ. F. Sin. is certainly strong in its favor.] : 

8 Ver. 12 —Luach. has σπόρον instead of σπέρμα, but it was probably occasioned hy the following σπόρον. The MSS. 
[B.D F.G.) are not very conclusive in its behalf. 

9 Ver. 10.—Rec. has χορηγήσαι, πληθύναι and αὐξήσαι instead of-er-et-er, but the weight of authority is against 
them. The future was turned intv an optative because it was supposed to be a wish. Comp. Rom. xvi. 20. Perhaps also 


there was a reminiscence of 1 Thess. iii. 111; 2 Thess. ii. 17; iii.5 (Meyer). The fut. form is sustained by B. C. Ὁ. Sin. and 
several Lat. fathers.] 


10 Ver. 12.—Lachm. has χριστῷ for θεῷ. He is sustained only by B. [and perhaps the Vulg.: in Domino.] 
1 Ver. 15.—Rec. has δέ after xapis, but contrary to much superior authorities. 


now introduces with most refined delicacy a 


EXEGETICAL AND CORITICAL. 


Vers. 1-5. For indeed concerning the 
ministering tothe saints, itis superfluous 
for me to write to you.—The use of γάρ, 
connecting what is here said with the preceding 
chapter, and περὶ μέν (instead of περὶ dé), shows 
that this chapter could not have been a distinct 
Epistle, and that the Apostle was not here begin- 
ning as it were a new subject (in consequence of 
a long interruption). It is possible indeed that 
he had been reviewing what he had written, and 
now saw that something was needed to complete 
his thought. However this may have been, he 


number of additional particulars, with the re- 
mark that he really had no need of writing to 
them with respect to the collection, for he was 
well aware of their readiness of themselves. 
The connection seems to be: ‘I have no occa- 
sion to write to you with reference to a minis- 
tration to the necessities of your brethren, but 
the point to which I would draw your attention 
is, a kind reception of the messengers from me,” 
If μέν should be taken as a solitarium [i, ¢., with- 
out a dé following it], its design must have been 
to give special prominence to the idea of the mi- 
nistration (διακονία), in contrast with his com. 





CHAP. IX. 1-15. 


153 





mendation of the persons who were to have 
charge of it. But we see no reason why the dé 
in ver. 3 should not be construed in correspond- 
ence with this μέν. This ministration, as in 
chap. viii. 4 (Meyer), signifies, a service of love, 
including the idea of something which was, a 
just debt, (a debitum ministerium), Rom. xiii. 8; 
Heb. vi. 10; 1 Pet. iv. 10, in conformity to 
Christ’s example, Matth. xx. 28, comp. Gal. v 
13. Περισσόν means superfluous, for the object 
Ihave in view. [What does the Apostle mean 
was superfluous? It was either: 1. The writing 
on the whole subject, notwithstanding the fact 
that he had written on it and was about to write 
more; 2. The writing, in contrast with his send- 
ing the brethren (ver. 5); 3. The writing on the 
collection itself in contrast with his having writ- 
ten to commend the brethren, and his being 
about to write of the manner and spirit of the 
collection]. De Wette enfeebles the expression by 
making itmean: ‘‘I regard it as superfluous.” Τὸ 
γράφειν is here the subject of the sentence.—For 
I know your forwardness of which Iam 
boasting concerning you tothe Macedoni- 
ans, that Achaia was ready from last year 
(ver. 2a). The mention of this readiness (προθυμία) 
was not a mere fiction of the Apostle for present 
effect. The commencement of the collection the 
preceding year (comp. chap. viii. 10f.) had shown 
that it was an actual fact, and that the Corin- 
thians only needed encouragement to complete 
the work as soon as possible. The use of the 
present tense (καυχῶμαι) shows that the Apostle 
was still in Macedonia. “Hy is an accusative 
with καυχῶμαι as in chap. xi. 80; Prov. xxvii. 1. 
The subject matter of his boasting was that 
Achaia had been ready the preceding year. 
The word ᾿Α χαΐα intimates the extent of his boast 
and the general prevalence of the Gospel through- 
out the province which was so called. It shows 
how confident he was that the whole province 
was virtually the Lord’s (comp. Osiander). . The 
Apostle implies that they were already prepared 
to commit their contributions to his hands. On 
ἀπὸ πέρυσι, comp. chap. viii. 10. He adds— 
and your zeal hath provoked the majority 
of them. (ver. 2b.)—The phrase ὁ ἐξ ὑμῶν ζῆλος 
properly signifies the zeal which proceeded from 
you, and is a kind of attraction [Winer’s Idioms, 
263]; asif he had said, the zeal which commenced 
with you, hath provoked, etc., comp. Matth. xxiv. 
17 et al. The majority (τοὺς πλείονας) indicates 
that only a small part of the Macedonians re- 
mained unaffected by it. In relation to this 
matter, comp. chap. viii. 3.—But I have sent 
the brethren, that what we have boasted 
concerning you might not be made vain 
in this respect; that as I said, ye may be 
ready (ver.3). The Apostle intended here to say, 
that while he had no need to write any thing 
with reference to the collection itself, inasmuch 
as he well knew that the Corinthians were en- 
tirely willing to contribute, he had nevertheless 
sent the brethren (chap. 16ff.) that they might 
have every thing in actual readiness, and that he 
might not be ashamed of what he had been confi- 
dently boasting of them among the Macedonians. 
Neander: Paul had doubtless said in Macedonia 
that the Corinthians were prepared to contri- 
bute the year before; this had inflamed the 








zeal of the Macedonians, and he now felt 
that it was needful to exhort the Corinthi- 
ans not to disappoint his hopes concerning 
them. The words τὸ καύχημα---ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν are 
in themselves general, and include everything 
of which he had boasted of them, but it is after- 
wards confined to the matter in hand by ἐν τῷ 
μέρει τούτῳ (in this respect). This limitation of 
the possibility of failure to that single point 
shows how confident he was that his general 
boast respecting them could not be broken down. 
Estius very properly calls this ‘‘ acris cwm tacita 
laude exhortatio.” That ye may be ready contains. 
the positive, and lest our boasting should be in vain, 
the negative part of this sentence.—Lest per- 
chance, if any Macedonians should come 
with me and should find you unprepared. 
(ver. 4a)—"Iva is here used as in Rom. vii. 18, and 
twice in Gal, iii. 14. The anxiety he had just in- 
timated he here expresses more definitely, but in. 
a very delicate manner, by the adverb μήπως,. 
which is in this place equivalent to ne forte in» 
ver. 4. He means, if any Macedonians should | 
come as his companions (chap. i. 16). [The per-- 
sons here spoken of are evidently not those: 
whom he had described in chap. vii. 16-23 and! 
ix. 8, and hence some have concluded that these : 
last could not have been Macedonians. It was- 
yet uncertain whether any would accompany’ 
him. But as Corinth was then a great com-- 
mercial as well as religious centre, some might; 
reasonably be expected to go]. On ἡμεῖς comp... 
ver. 3. We, not to say you, should be. 
put to shame in the matter of this confi-. 
dence. (ver.44).—We are not to regard thislittle» 
parenthesis (we say not ye, ἵνα py λέγωμεν ὑμεῖς),. 
as a mere pleasantry, but on the other hand as: 
aedelicate attempt to stimulate their feelings : 
of self-respect; since the shame would. in- 
deed be theirs if the Apostle’s expression of © 
confidence in them should not be borne out in: 
fact. W. F. Besser:—‘‘In this little sentence 
we may discover the extreme delicacy of Paul’s 
feelings, and the affectionate civility which char- 
acterized his intercourse, but which are especi- 
ally prominent in this most personal of all his 
Epistles.” The ὑπόστασις is simply the confi- 
dence which had been expressed in the boasting. 
Comp. chap. xi. 17; Heb. xi. 1, and frequently in 
the Sept., but the word has not here precisely 
the sense of, business, thing. The Corinthians 
would be put to shame should they not come up 
to what the Apostle confidently expected of them. 
[He had stimulated the Macedonians by saying - 
that the Corinthians had begun the collection, . 
and then when he found that the Corinthians : 
had not finished their contribution according to. 
his expectation and his boast of them, he very 
properly stimulated the Corinthians by telling» 
them that the Macedonians had completed their 
collection. He had boasted that the Corinthians 
were ‘‘prepared” the last year for the collec- 
tion, and yet now he found it necessary to send‘ 
deputies to have them ‘ prepared” for deliver- 
ing it up]. In all this there is surely no ground! 
for suggesting that Paul was acting a cunning: 
part, or was conforming to the shrewd policy of 
the world (Riickert); or that he here exhibits. 
something of human infirmity (de Wette) Comp. 
Meyer, Osiander. And yet we may properly 





154 





concede and maintain that he here shows most 
consummate art.—I therefore thought it 
necessary to exhort the brethren that 
they would go before to you, and make 
up beforehand the bounty I have already 
promised (ver. 5a).—The Apostle here brings 
out with more particularity the business of the 
deputies he was sending. Ovv, in accordance 
with what he had just said, signifies, i order to 
prevent our being ashamed. The πρὸ in προέλϑωσιν 
signifies, before the arrival of myself and the 
Macedonians. Προεπηγγελμένην signifies, before 
promised by me (comp. ver. 2 ff.) not announced 
to you [as in the Eng. vers. ] or promised by you. 
ES Hodge thinks it means what the Corinthians 

ad promised.’ We are nowhere told of such a 
promise, though the confident expectations of the 
Apostle had some reasonable foundation. As we 
suppose this to have been his information respect- 
ing them, and as wé are informed of the Apos- 
tle’s promise to the Macedonians respecting them, 
we prefer to refer προεπήγ. to what he had said 
in ver. 2. The thrice repeated προ (in composi- 
tion) shows the Apostle’s extreme forethought ]. 
Ταύτην ἐτοίμην εἶναι designates the result aimed 
at in the προκαταρτίσωσι τὴν evAoyiav—that the 
same may be ready in the manner ofa 
blessing, and not asa covetousness. (ver. 
5 6.)—With this designation of their gift or their 
benificence as a εὐλογία in the sense of an act of 
love produced by Divine grace, after the example 
of Godand directed tothe welfare of men, in which 
one gives cheerfully and with full hand, accord- 
ing to ability, he now connects an admonitory 
hint, that it should be so given as to appear a 
blessing, and not an act of covetousness. As 
εὐλογία includes essentially the idea of an abun- 
dance, so does πλεονεξία that of scantiness; but 
ef what these consist is not necessarily implied 
in the words themselves. Neander takes εὐλογία 


as if it corresponded with the Hebrew F599 
Tf se 


(blessing) and signified, a communication of some 
good, and then a token of affection; and πλεονεξία 
as meaning covetousness, extortion, something 
extorted. W. F. Besser:—‘‘ This contribution 
to the common benefit of the Church may be 
called a blessing in two respects: first, as a gift 
from God, inasmuch as it was the result of His 
grace in the hearts of His people (chap. viii. 1), 
and secondly, as an offering to God, but de- 
posited in the hands of His poor.” [In the Eng- 
lish version εὐλογία is translated ‘‘ bounty,” but 
this fails of bringing out the idea of good will on 
the part of the giver. The Greek word signifies 
etymologically, a blessing by word, and to this 
was added, by Hellenistic usage, the idea of a 
blessing by action, by a present (Gen. xxxiii. 11; 
Judg. i. 15; comp. Prov. xi. 25). Οὕτως is not 
redundant, but draws attention to the following 
εὐλογίαν, as if it were to be taken in its peculiar 
signification; with ὡς it signifies, so as, in the 
manner of]. The whole phrase, οὕτως ὡς, εἰς.» 
relates to the special character of the gift: ἐν ¢., 
it should be an act of real benevolence, liberally 
dispensing what it has, and not of covetousness, 
withholding as much as possible, from a regard to 
self alone. [The context shows that the givers 
and notthose collecting the gifts are here alluded 
10 (inasmuch as these collectors might be actu- 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





ated by a covetous spirit and extort from the 
people). If wetake the expression in its utmost 
strictness, it signifies the laying down of a small 
amount, because the giver wishes to reserve more 
than he needs for himself. [THEopHyL:—‘“‘As 
if he were over-reached by some one, or cheated 
out of it.” Dr. Clarke thinks there is an allusion 
to the two kinds of chests which were set for 
alms in the Temple: the one for what the law 
required as necessary for every one, the other 
for the free-will offerings. To the one all men 
gave, because they were obliged to do so, but to 
the other those only gave who had pity on the 
poor]. But the Apostle explains his meaning 
more fully in vv. 6, 7, where he traces the course 
of each giver to its proper result, and reminds 
his readers that even the costliest gift has no 
value in the sight of God, if it is not given with 
a benevolent and cheerful spirit. 

Vers. 6, 7. But as to this, He that sows 
sparingly shall reap sparingly, and he 
that sows with blessings shall reap with 
blessings.—The τοῦτο has sometimes been re- 
ferred to ὁ σπείρων, as if it designated this kind 
of seed [he who sows this sparingly, Meyer]; but 
this would require an inappropriate emphasis 
upon τοῦτο. Others, therefore, [as our English 
version does] supply λέγω, or φημί; but every 
where else the Apostle in similar cases gives us 
the verb itself (1 Cor. vii. 29; xv. 50; Gal. iii. 
17). Others supply ἐστιν in the sense of this is 
as if, (οὕτως ἔχει). But to avoid a feeble con- 
struction, it seems better to take it (with Meyer) 
as an accus. absol. ‘‘as to this, viz., that it ought 
to be ὡς εὐλογία and not ὡς πλεονεξία, he which,” 
etc. He connects φειδομένως in sense with καὶ μὴ 
ὡς πλεονεξίαν, and places it at the beginning of 
the sentence. On σπείρειν----ϑερίζειν, comp. 1 Cor. 
ix. 11; Gal. vi. 7ff.; Prov. xix.17. [In almost 
all recent copies of the English authorized ver- 
sion, the word also has twice crept into this 
verse as a gloss]. He who does good sparingly 
shall have a corresponding recompense, a par- 
ticipation but sparingly in the blessings of sal- 
vation, i. 6., an inferior (it is not said, no) re- 
ward of grace. In contrast with this stands ἐπ’ 
εὐλογίαις σπείρειν and ϑερίζειν, where the second 
ἐπ’ εὐλογίαις, for the sake of emphasis, follows 
immediately after the first. ’Ex’ εὐλογίαις has 
the sense of, abundantly [though this misses the 
idea of its being a gift of love, Alford], either: 
with blessings (the relation being in the thing 
itself), the blessings which he gives and receives ; 
or: for blessings, with a view to blessings, and 
the blessings which he shall receive, [ALFoRD: 
‘this will not suit the second ἐπ’ evdoy.”] Ne- 
ander (on the ground that εὐλογία involves the 
collateral idea of a voluntary gift of affection), 
paraphrases it, ‘‘he who sows in such a way, that 
it is seen to be agift of love.” [Stanley: ‘En’, 
on the condition, these are the terms on which we 
give, as in Luke vi. 88, comp. 1 Cor. ix. 10]. 
The plural gives increased force to the idea of 
abundance. A similar contrast may be noticed 
in Proy. ix. 24. [Beza notices a triple Hebra- 
ism in the phrase ἐπ᾽ εὐλογίαις : 1, in the use of 
ἐπὶ with a noun when the whole has an adver- 
bial signification, as ‘‘in justitia,” for justly; 2, 
in calling the act of charity evAoyia, with refer- 
ence to the Heb, ΚΤ 2) free-will offerings; 3 

se i 


CHAP. LX. 1-1ὸ. 


SS a aaa aaa TR ττάτυν τ 

in using the plural for emphasis. We may also 
notice the variety of euphemisms by which the 
contribution is designated in this whole section 
according to the side from which it is viewed. 
With reference to its source, it is χάρις; in its 
relation to the church’s life, it is κοινωνία; in its 
relation to public servants, it is διακονία; in its be- 
neficial purposes, itis εὐλογία; and as a public act 
of piety it is a λειτουργία]. The Romish doctrine of 
merit is one entirely foreign to our text, and totally 
inconsistent with Paul’s spirit.—Let each one 
give as he hath before purposed in his 
-heart, not grudgingly, nor of necessity, 
for Godlovetha cheerful giver. (ver.7.)--The 
verb dérw must be supplied from ὁ σπείρων and δότην 
as the predicate of ἕκαστος. Katac προαιρεῖται, 
as his heart freely prompts him. The definite 
purpose with respect to the amount each one 
would give, the Apostle supposes to be already 
formed when he comes to give, though in ver. 6 
he had spoken of it as in the future (Meyer). 
In contrast with this cheerful, free self-determi- 
nation, he places another which springs ἐκ λύπης, 
ἐξ ἀνάγκης. ᾿Εκ indicates the source from which 
the gift proceeds: a morose, gloomy frame of 
mind, properly a sadness at parting with what 
it gives; or, from compulsion, as when a man 
gives from necessity; because he cannot avoid it 
(comp. Philem, ver. 14). W. F. Besser: It is 
one of the secondary results of the factions which 
prevailed at Corinth, that Paul was thus induced 
to warn us against all undue compulsion in cha- 
ritable collections, and to admonish us in such 
matters to give with sincere pleasure; for no- 
thing more completely poisons an act of charity 
than a manifest spirit of rivalry or a mere love 
of distinction.”” To encourage them in this 
cheerful contribution, he reminds them of a 
Scriptural expression which, however, is not 
fully quoted. By way of emphasis, and for a 
more striking contrast with λύπη and ἀνάγκη, the 
ἱλαρόν of the concluding sentence is placed at the 
commencement (comp. ἐν ἱλαρότητι in Rom. xii. 
8). The passage here thus freely quoted, is an 
addition to the original by the Septuagint in 
Prov. xxii. 8: "ἄνδρα ἱλαρὸν καὶ δότην εὐλογεῖ 
(var. ἀγαπᾷ) ὁ ϑεός. Comp. ἀγαπᾷ with εὐπρόσ- 
δεκτος in chap. villi. 12. 

Vers. 8-11.—And God is able to make 
all grace abound toward you, that ye 
having always all sufficiency in every- 
thing, may have an abundance for every 
good work. (ver.8).—Having admonished them 
to be bountiful and cheerful in their contribution 
he here assures them, that God could and would 
amply bless them in it, and that they had abund- 
ant reason to be of good cheer and confide in 
Him. It was ver. 8 which induced Francke to 
build the Orphan’s House at Halle.* δυνατός is 
emphatic at the commencement of ver. 8: He 
can, and of course he will doit. Aé introduces 
another element in the matter viz: the power of 
Him who takes pleasure in a joyful giver, to pro- 
vide for him abundantly. Itisa question whether 


{*In order to procure means to assist the poor of Halle, 
Francke placed a charity-box at the door of his own house 
inscribed with 1 John iii. 17 and 2 Cor. ix.7. One day 
eee Easter 1695), on opening this box he found a sum 
only 7 gulden) so much larger than he had before been able 
to devote at one time to works of charity that he resolved 
immediately to found a free school for poor children.] 





155 





χόρις includes merely bodily or only spiritual 
benefits, or whether it may not embrace both. 
Πᾶσαν is in favor of the latter view, and the de- 
tailed statements which are given seem to de. 
mand some reference to bodily things. Brssrnr: 
‘‘God can bestow upon us abundantly, not only 
the grace which makes us rejoice in the Lord 
and so prepares us to give with joyful hearts 
(Chap. viii. 2), but the grace which bestows on 
us that abundance of earthly blessings and that 
prosperity which enables us to give so liberally.” 
Περισσεῦσαι as in Chap. iv. 15 must be taken in 
a transitive sense. The accumulation of such 
words as ἐν παντὶ, πάντοτε and πᾶσαν in this sen- 
tence is very emphatic, and is similar to another 
in Phil. i. 3 ff. Αὐτάρκεια must here be construed 
in an objective sense as meaning a sufficiency. 
Πᾶσα αὐτάρκεια signifies a condition which war- 
rants us in being perfectly contented, a sufficient 
subsistence even for corporeal comfort. Meyer 
makes it have reference to a subjective habit of 
the mind, 7. e., the ethical condition which pre- 
pared them to abound unto every good work; 
such a satisfaction with their condition as would 
make them always contented, comp. 1. Tim. vi. 
6, Phil. iv. 11. The more particular definitions, 
however, which he proceeds to give (ἐν mavti— 
πᾶσιν, as well as ἔχοντες) seem more agreeable 
to the objective explanation; and the ‘‘abound- 
ing to every good work,”’ (which cannot mean, 
in an ethical sense, merely a growth in beneyo- 
lence, but beneficence in an abundant degree), 
is that to which the full sufficiency could and 
should lead; indeed it was precisely that state 
in which notwithstanding its deep poverty 8 
περισσεύειν was said to tdke place (chap. viii. 2). 
The correct way seems to be, to take all these 
expressions, grace, sufficiency and good work, 
in a general sense, so as to include even the cor- 
poreal or earthly condition. Every good work 
would therefore mean any act which tends to ac- 
complish the divine purposes, and to promote 
the kingdom of God; and which dispenses bene- 
fits of a corporeal nature to brethren in distress. 
This ought to be the outflowing of that complete 
sufficiency, which is secured by divine grace 
in every department of life, even in respect to 
corporeal affairs.—In ver. 9 he illustrates what 
he had thus said by another Scriptural passage 
from Ps. cxii. 9.—As it is written, He scat- 
tered abroad, he gave to the poor, his 
righteousness abides forever.—The person 
respecting whom this had been said was the pi- 
ousman. Σκορπίζειν, which occurs also in John 
x. 12, xvi. 32, signifies to scatter, here to scatter 
abroad (as in sowing), and it has the sense of 
abundantly distributing on every side. BENGEL: 
‘“‘Without anxious thought in what direction 
every grain may fall.” Πένης signifies one who 
works for his daily bread (πένομαι) [one not so 
poor as πτωχός, who lives on alms, but one wha 
has nothing superfluous, WeBsTER p. 227] there- 
fore one who is poor and needy. It occurs no 
where else in the New Testament. Δικαιοσύνη is 
not the merit which is gained as the result or the 
reward of well doing, but the righteousness or 
good conduct itself. It signifies here especially 
that which is seen when one does good (not im- 
mediately, beneficence, at least not in the sense 
of that which is the cause of justification, since 


it is rather the result of justification ; comp. Gal. 
vy. 6, 22, Col. iii. 12 ff.). Beneficence is called 
δικαιοσύνη (comp. ver. 10 and Matt. vi. 1), *‘be- 
cause it is an act of justice, not to retain for our 
own exclusive use, what God has given to all in 
common” (Ampros.). Ewatp: ‘To the extent 
in which our free alms is the fruit of a higher 
feeling of love and righteousness, it is no doubt 


called ΠῚ» in Proy. x. 2 xi. 4. To remain 


forever implies not merely a permanent reputa- 
tion among men, but the everlasting continuance 
of righteousness, blessing us with its loving spi- 
rit not only in the present life, but glorifying us 
and blessing us with the same spirit as a gracious 
reward through eternal ages (comp. 1 John ii. 
17). [On εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, consult TRencu, Synn. 2d 
Ser. pp. 35-41.]—What Paul had described in 
ver. 8 as only a possible thing on God’s part, he 
speaks of in ver. 10 as though it were surely to 
be expected.—But he who supplies seed 
for the sower, and bread for the eating, 
will supply and multiply your seed 
sown, and increase the fruits of your 
righteousness ;—In these words of Isaiah (in 
which only ἐπεχορηγεῖν, to furnish, to grant, is sub- 
stituted for the διδόναι of the Sept.) h’e describes 
God as the source from which these things were 
to be expected. He leads us to expect in the 
economy of grace and in the government of the 
church something analogous to what God is con- 
tinually doing in the economy of nature. [Words- 
worth: yopyyé was properly said of a wealthy 
person supplying the requisite funds for the 
equipment and training of atragic χορὸς. Hence 
with the accus. and the dat., it came to mean to 
supply anything for a purpose. ’Em? sometimes 
implies a supply of one thing after another. 
Comp. 2 Pet. i.5. Dr. Clarke thinks the verb 
here has some allusion to its early meaning: to 
leada chorus, and that God is represented as lead- 
ing up the grand chorus of causes and effects, and 
providing for the whole host of benevolent work- 
ers in His kingdom.] The participal sentence 
extends not merely to τῷ σπείροντι but to βρῶσιν, 
for not only does the symmetry of our sentence 
demand this, but the passage in Isaiah requires 
it. [Our English translators have generally 
followed the received Greek text, which reads 
χορηγήσαι, πληθῦναι and αὐξήσαι in the optative 
instead of the futures χορηγήσει, πληθυνεῖ and 
αὐξήσει. They have also followed the Vulgate and 
joined καὶ ἄρτον εἰς βρῶσιν with the subsequent 
verb. In this way the whole becomes a prayer 
of the Apostle for his Corinthian brethren: 
‘*May he who ministers seed to the sower both 
minister bread for your food, and multiply your 
seed sown.” This seems unsupported not only 
by external but by internal evidence; for Paul 
was aiming to supply reasons and motives to 
liberality, on the ground that no one would lose 
or be straitened on account of large contribu- 
tions. Nota prayer, but a promise was needful 
for this.] Corresponding with the supply of the 
seed to the sower is the assurance that the same 
Being would bestow upon them and multiply for 
them that which would be necessary to their 
sowing, 7. 6. to their work of beneficence. This 
has reference not merely to their future doings 
as a consequence of; or asa Divine blessing upon; 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ae 





their present liberality (Riickert); but, as the 
context and aim of the writer evidently require,” 
to the benefaction then in progress (comp. δι᾽ 
ἡμῶν in ver. 11). It is not till we come to the 
second member of the sentence, that we find'the 
blessing upon the future action exclusively re- 
ferred to: and will increase the fruits of your 
righteousness. This corresponds to the bread 
for eating, and the whole signifies: As God — 
makes the scattered seed grow until it brings © 
forth fruit and so gives bread for the eating 
(βρῶσις signifies the act of eating), so will He ὃ 
bless your sowing, your work of beneficence, 
and cause the fruits of your good conduct to in- 
crease. The fruits of righteousness correspond 
to the bread before spoken of, in the enjoyment 
of which the reward of diligence in sowing is 
acquired. The expression (in the sense of καρπὸς 
ix.) occurs also in Hos, x. 12, But are we here 
to regard it as applicable to spiritual or worldly 
blessings? In the latter sense it would corres- 
pond with the interpretation we have given above 
to ver. 8. With great propriety the ancient 
church selected vy. 6-10 for being read on the 
day appointed for the commemoration of St. Lau- 
rentius (Aug. 10).*— Being enriched in 
everything unto all simplicity which 
works out through us thanksgiving to 
God.—In this verse the Apostle gives some ad- 
ditional particulars which may assist in deter- 
mining his meaning. We have an anacoluthon, 
in which the participle stands as a nominative, 
like εἰδότες in chap. i. 7, as if ὑμεῖς had been ex- 
pressed in ver. 10. A similar construction may 
be seen in Col. iii. 16.—There is no need of sup- 
plying ἐστέ [so that the sentence shall read: ye 
shall be enriched, etc.] for the connection with 
ver. 8 would not be suitable. As vv. 9 and 10 
have an obvious connection with ver. 8, they 
cannot be taken as a parenthesis. [Our English 
A. V. regards ver. 9f. as a parenthesis, but in- 
serts no ἐστέ, forit regards πλουτιζ. as an indepen- 
dent nominative. It is better to connect it (not 
with ver. 8 but) with the verse immediately before 
it: ‘*God will increase the fruits of your right- 
eousness (7. 6. your resources), being enriched” 
(i. 6. so that ye shall be enriched) ete. Hover. ] 
Ἔν παντί shows that their being enriched was 
in the most comprehensive sense of the word, and 
it is implied that πᾶσα ἁπλότης, in the sense of 
perfect simplicity (chap. viii. 2) was to be the 
result (though not precisely the designed object) 


[* Laurentius was one of the seven deacons at Rome, and 
had the care of the treasury forthe poor. When his master 
Pope Sextus II. was led forth to martyrdom, L. begged to 
accompany him in this as he had done in other sacrifices, but 
he was told that he would not have long to wait. The gover- 
nor of the city demanded that he should surrender the trea~ 
sures which he so liberally dispensed to the poor. At the 
end of three days he made his appearance, followed by a vast 
train of miserable, lame and crippled persons, to whom he 
pointed, saying, “ These are our treasures.” The governor, 
feeling insulted, immediately had him slowly roasted upon 
an iron seat or gridiron until he died (Aug. 9, A. Ὁ. 255), 
His dying words were, “ Enter'not into judgment with thy 
servant,” εἰς, Ps.cxliii. 2. The Church in after times observed 
Aug. 10, in his memory, and as his speech and life were 
looked upon as an admirable illustration of 2 Cor. ix. 6-10, 
that passage with profound judgment was assigned for the 
Scriptural revding of that day (harvest time). Whatever 
uncertainty rests upon the precise details of this story, 
Augustine has given his sanction to its general verity when 
he says: ‘As easily might you hide the glory of Rome itself 
as that of the crown of Laurentius.”] 





a a 


CHAP. ΙΧ. 1-15. 


157 


eee 


of the enrichment. The Divine blessing upon 
those who sincerely loved their brethren and 
cheerfully assisted them in time of trouble, would 
be seen in their becoming rich in all spiritual 
and temporal blessings. The final result would 
be such a perfect simplicity or singleness of heart, 
and such a pure benevolence as knows nothing 
of selfish interests or painful forebodings, and 
manifests itself in a free and ample supply of 
others’ wants. [The word ““ bountifulness” in 
our version hardly expresses this.] Such a sim- 
plicity is not only the fruit of an abundant spi- 
ritual life, but is an actual experience which 
blesses even with temporal benefits those who 
kindly endeavor to alleviate the distresses of 
their brethren. In the relative sentence which 
works through us, etc., the Apostle comes back to 
the collection which had its origin and support 
in this ἁπλότης, and he gives prominence to one 
result of this simplicity which admirably corres- 
ponded to its origin, (chap. viii. 1), inasmuch as 
it produced a spirit of thanksgiving to God. 
Ἥτις is here probably not causal, in the sense of 
quippe que, but equivalent to 7. It is thus like 
ὅστις, a8 Commonly used in the later prose; or 
it is equivalent to: something which was work- 
ing. In 0d? ἡμῶν Paul refers to himself and his 
assistants in the work of collection, since it was 
through their hands that the gift would be com- 
municated and the receivers would thus be in- 
duced to give God thanks. To veo is by some 
made dependent upon κατεργάζεται (for, or in 
behalf of God), but it is better to make it depen- 
dent upon εὐχαριστίαν, inasmuch as the construc- 
tion of the verb will then be preserved (Meyer: 
a dative of appropriation).—The reason for this 
thanksgiving he finds (ver. 12) in the collection 
then in progress. 

Vers. 12-15.—Because the ministration 
of this service supplieth not only the 
wants of the saints, but also abounds 
through many thanksgivings unto God.— 
Neanver: ‘The Apostle here brings forward 
another motive for their cheerful contribution, 
in the material and moral benefits which the 
saints at Jerusalem would derive from it.” The 
ministration spoken of was not the service which 
Paul and his associates performed when they 
took charge of the collection, but as in ver. 13, 
the service of those who took parce in the contri- 
bution itself. Τῆς λειτουργίας ταύτης shows more 
particularly that it was something done for the 
Christian community (comp. Rom. xy. 27; Phil. 
ii. 25). The ministration, therefore, which con- 
sists in such a service must be of the same na- 
ture (Meyer: the work of distributing the alms). 
Whether such a word implies that this friendly 
service was an act of worship, or such a sacred 
performance as to deserve the name of an odla- 
tion (comp. Phil. iv. 18; Heb. xiii. 16), may be 


left in doubt.* In this inference the Apostle 


(* The word λειτουργία, by which the Apostle designates 
once more the contribution of the Corinthians, was derived 
from the old Greek, aud especially the Attic language. 
Etymologically it was from Aéiros, of or belonging to the 
people, and ἔργον. a work, a public work in the service of the 
people. At Athens, if was any public service (as the con- 
ducting of the public shows, or theatres, or choirs (ver. 10), 
or the supply of food for the people on public occasions) 
which the weajthier citizens discharged at their own ex- 
pense, and usually in rotation. The word passed over into 











intended to say that the ministration of which 
he was speaking would not only supply a want 
of the saints (προσαναπληροῦσα being strictly 
equivalent to: supplying by addition, chap. xi. 
9), but would overflow through many thanks- 
givings toward God, or would cause such thanks- 
giving to ascend in greatabundance. Here also 
τῷ ϑεῷ is governed, not by περισσεύουσα, but by 
εὐχαριστιῶν. [See T. Lewis’ explanation and 
illustration of this text in The Divine and Human 
in the Scriptures, Ὁ. 839.—As they glorify God 
on account of the proof which this minis- 
tration gives of the subjection which 
flows from your confession of the Gospel 
of Christ (ver. 13a). The Apostle here does no- 
thing more than to define with more particularity 
what he had just said, but with a connection of 
the participle similar to that which we have seen 
in ver. Il; as if he had written in ver. 12: in 
consequence of the fact that many give thanks, etc 
Διά points out the external medium (7. 6., the oc- 
casion) of a thing; in this place of the δοξάζειν, 
ete. [They (the thankful recipients) glorifying 
God when they saw the proof which this minis- 
tration gives, efc.]. The attempt to bring this 
word into immediate connection with ver. 12 ig 
arbitrary and unnatural (comp. Osiander and 
Meyer). By δοκιμῆς (chap. viii. 2) we must un- 
derstand either the evidence which this service 
would give that the Corinthians were approved, 
or the evidence which this service would give 
that the distribution itself was right and just, 
z. e., that it was such as might be expected from 
the Christian standard of benevolence (Meyer 
after Theophylact: διὰ τῆς δοκίμου ταύτης καὶ pe- 
μαρτυρημένης ἐπὶ φιλανϑρωπία διακονίας). In be- 
half of the latter view may be alleged the most 
natural signification of the words, and the fact 
that with ἐπέ is introduced a reason for thanks- 
giving which related to fhe Corinthians. It may 
be added that the δοκιμῆ of the διακονία must have 
been also a test of the Corinthians. That which 
was the object of their thanksgiving is said to be 
the ὑποταγὴ τῆς ὁμολογίας ὑμῶν. In Hellenistic 
Greek, ὁμολογία signifies: confession (not: agree- 
ment, comp. 1 Tim. vi. 12; Heb. ili. 1; iv. 14; 
x. 23), and it is the word for the way in which 
faith is outwardly expressed or made known 
(comp. Rom. x. 9 f.). Eig τὸ εὐαγγέλιον may 
therefore be joined with it, analogously with 
πῖστις εἰς χριστὸν, πιστεύειν----οεἰς τὸ φῶς, and simi- 
lar phrases. We should indeed have expected 
the article (τῆς) before εἰς τὸ evay. to give it more 
definiteness, but we ought not to regard this as 
indispensable, inasmuch as we find every where 
great liberty inthe use of it. Comp. Winer, 3 
19, 2. The same is true with respect to τῆς 


Scriptural and ecclesiastical language, retaining principally 
the two ideas of a work or service, and a service of the pub- 
lic. In the New Testament, sometimes one and sometimes 
another of the historical ideas connected with the word is 
most prominent. It is sometimes a secular employment, 
though still in the service of God (Rom. xiii. 6, comp. 
Eccles. vii. 30), sometimes a service done to a public servant 
of the Church (Phil. ii. 30) sometimes a ministry of instruc- 
tion, but more usually it was applied to the priestly or sac- 
rificial services (Luke i. 23; Heb. viii. 2,6; ix. 21; x. 11). 
The more ethical idea is appropriate in our passage, viz.: ἃ 
voluntary act of benevolence for the public good, but for 
God’s service, and hence an offering to the Lord of the 
Church. Comp. Osiander. The Art. Liturgie in Hertzog’s 
Encyc. by PALMER]. ’ 


108 THE SECOND EPISTLE 


———— Η,»ϑ,κΒΒ-.᾿Τττ’, τ -- 


κοινωνίας εἰς αὑτούς, where the article is in like 
manner absent, and the same would still be true 
if we were to join εἰς τὸ evayy. with ὑπακοῇ, 80 
that the phrase should mean a complying or obe- 
dient disposition toward the Gospel; in which 
case τῆς ὁμολογίας would appear to be the source 
of the ὑπακοή : on account of the obedience which 
results from your confession. On the other 
hand, by joining ὁμολογίας with εἰς τὸ evayy., the 


ὁμολογία may be regarded also as the object of | 


the ὑπακοή, so that the idea shall be: since ye 
are obedient to your confession. [Beza, whom 
our A. V. follows, gives to the genitive the force 
of a participle, and renders τῇ ὑποτ. τῆς ὁμολ. 
ὑμῶν: ‘your professed subjection.” Doddridge, 
however, well remarks, that ‘the words express 
not merely a professed, but a real subjection to 
the Gospel which was professed”’]. But the con- 
fession towards, or with reference to, the Gos- 
pel (=the confession directed to the Gospel), is 
the confession of a faith in which love com- 
pletely sacrifices itself for another’s good (comp. 
chap. viii. 9), and it therefore essentially re- 
quires that those who make it should cherish and 
put forth a similar love (comp. 1 John iii. 16). 
Correspondent with this confession is the ὑπακοῇ 
of which the Apostle here speaks. Another rea- 
son for this thanksgiving is given in the words—- 
And for the simplicity of your commu- 
nion with them and with all. (ver. 13 .)— 
Κοινωνία, as in chap. viii. 4, means the practical 
communion which is shown in the communication 
of aid. Bic shows the direction in which this pro- 
ceeds. The addition of év¢ πάντας was probably 
intended to suggest that it was well known gen- 
erally and possibly among the Christians at Jeru- 
salem, that the Corinthians were in the habit. of 
sympathizing, ina practical way, and especially 
by a hospitable reception in their city, with Chris- 
tians of every country. That those Jewish Chris- 
tians should have concluded that the Corinthians 
were equally liberal to all simply because they 
were liberal to such distant brethren, does not 
seem equally probable. The connection of εἰς τὸ 
εὐαγγέλιον and εἰς αὐτοὺς, etc., with δοξαζοντες in 
the sense of: they glorify God, with reference 
to the Gospel, to themselves and to all (Meyer), 
has something very feeble and forced about it. 
Such a connection is required neither by the 
want of the article (see above) nor by the εἰς, in- 
asmuch as this preposition fits very well here as 
expressive of tendency or direction; and might, 
according to the analogy of other words, be very 
properly substituted for the dative after ὁμολογίας 
and κοινωνίας. [The sense of the whole would 
then be: ‘‘they who receive such a proof as this 
ministration gives, will give glory to God for 
your obedience to the confession you have made 
with respect to the Gospel of Christ, and for the 
common fellowship with them and with all Chris- 
tians which your single-hearted liberality dis- 
plays.” ]—Since they also, with prayer for 
you, long after you on account of the ex- 
ceeding grace of God toward [among] you 
(ver. 14), It is somewhat difficult to decide 
with which of the previous sentences this verse 
ought to be connected. Against its connection 
with ver. 12, it may be objected, 1, the extreme 
length of the intervening ver. 18; 2, that διά 
goes not stand before δεήσεως as it does before 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. 




















» 
εὐχαριστιῶν, etc.; 8, that αὐτῶν stands emph 
cally at the head of the sentence, but on 
construction has no special emphasis. If we 
connect it with ver. 18, supplying ἐπί before 
δεήσει as previously before ἀπλότητι, it seems — 
strange that they should be said to give glory to 
God for their own prayers; and to obviate | 
the language can hardly be made to signify 
hearing of their prayers. We should prefer 
connect it with δοξάζοντες in such a way as 1) 
point out the manner in which they give glory Ὁ 
God: not only by their thanksgiving (vy. 
13) but by their intercessions. It must be con- 
ceded, however, that such a construction is 
somewhat harsh. The best way, therefore, pro- 
bably is to take αὐτῶν ἐπιποϑούντων together asa 
genitive absolute, (for we find this common 
enough with classical writers, where there is no 
distinction of subject), so that the meaning 
should be: ‘they, also, with prayers (7. 6., in 
the midst of prayers) for you, longing after you, _ 
etc. There is nothing really forced or imperti- 
nent in this definition of ἐπιποϑεῖν by δεήσει; it 
is rather a delicate way of hinting at the pious 
spirit which prompted this longing. There is 
an apparent inappropriateness in this word 
ἐπιποϑεῖν, inasmuch as the churches could never 
be expected to come personally together. Some 
have, therefore, given it the meaning, cordially 
to love; but no example of such a meaning has 
been adduced. Nowhere else in the Scriptures 
is a meeting together of Christians in the future 
world (αἰὼν μέλλων) spoken of in this way as an 
object of Christian yearning. Neander takes 
ἐπιποϑεῖν to be the ardent longing which is 
prompted by Christian love to have a better per- 
sonal acquaintance with other Christians, and 
hence the final aim of this benevolent contribu- 
tion may have been, to bring these Jewish Chris- 
tians to acknowledge the Gentile Christians as 
their brethren in the kingdom of God. We 
must, however, remember that in the present 
case the more complete fellowship and the more 
animated enjoyment of common spiritual bless- 
ings in the church were actually brought about 
by means of personal intercourse through depu- 
ties. This is hinted at in the reason which is 
immediately subjoined: διὰ τὴν ὑπερβάλλουσαν 
χάριν ἐφ ὑμῖν. ’Eri here designates them as the 
persons among whom Divine grace was active, 
and it is to be connected with ὑπερβάλλουσαν. 
The idea then would be: on account of the grace _ 
of God which superabounds towards you, i. 6.» 
because the grace of God is superabundant 
among or upon you. The charitable contribu- ς΄ 
tion was only one out of many streams flowing 
from this riches of grace (Osiander). As the 
Apostle contemplated this abundant result of 
Divine’ grace in the Corinthian Church, there 
arose from his deepest soul an outburst of holy 
thankfulness, to-which he now gives expression. 
—Thanks be unto God for his unspeaka- 
ble gift (ver. 15).—in this exclamation we need 
not suppose that he was endeavoring to repress 
some feeling of self-gratulation which he appre- 
hended might spring up in the hearts of the Co- 
rithians on account of what he had just said. 
The ‘unspeakable gift of God” was not strictly 
or exclusively the fortunate result which God 
had brought about by means of the collection, 


aa 


CHAP. IX. 1-15. 





for the expression is rather too strong for such 
an application. The Apostle’s mind was evi- 
dently upon the great gift of redemption with 
all its rich results; (especially) in the church 
where was found that simple spirit of benevo- 
lence, on which depended all the good results of 
which he had been speaking. But the entire 
spiritual blessing which he expected from God’s 
grace included the particular effect of Divine 
grace or the especial blessing which God’s love 
had conferred onthem. (The difference between 
Meyer’s and Osiander’s exposition on this point 
is not essential). 

[Stantey: “In these four last verses the 
Apostle throws himself forward into the time 
when a’ Jerusalem he should receive the thanks 
of the Jewish Christians for this contribution, 
and thereby witness the completion of the har- 
mony between the Jewish and Gentile Churches. 
Hence the impassioned thanksgiving for what 
else seems an inadequate occasion. Compare 
the abrupt introduction of similar thanksgivings 
in Rom. ix. 5; xi. 33-36; 1 Cor. xv. 57; Gal. i. 
5; Eph. iii. 20; 1 Tim. i. 17]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. As God looks upon the heart, the acceptable- 
ness of an act of benevolence in His sight depends 
upon the cheerfulness with which it is rendered, 
upon the degree in which those who are filled 
with Divine love find a real pleasure in relieving 
those who are in want. This inward delight 
will be shown inthe pleasant manner with which 
the outward act is accompanied, and the receiver 
will thus be satisfied that the giver is glad to be 
called upon, and to be able to perform a duty 
which a God of goodness has committed to him. 
Where this spirit is wanting, and it is evident 
that the man gives with a painful reluctance, 
from a regard only to the expectations of others, 
from a vain ambition not to fall behind those 
of equal or less wealth, or from the urgent im- 
portunities of others, the gift will have no value 
in God’s sight, however costly it may be. But 
a cheerful heart will always make an open hand; 
whatever the man has will be freely dispensed, 
with no close or anxious calculations of the 
amount, if he can only be sure of doing good, 
and of relieving or removing the necessities of 
his fellow-men. Accordingly God has declared 
that everything sown in this spirit shall bring 
forth a corresponding harvest, that those who 
give from necessity, sparingly, unwillingly, or 
half willingly, shall have a proportionate gain, 
and that those who give cheerfully and liberally 
shall have showered upon them an abundance 
not only of spiritual but of temporal blessings. 
As the result of both these kinds of blessing, the 
cheerful giver will acquire that noble and perfect 
simplicity which more completely surrenders 
everything to One who never fails to supply 
every want, and which is more and more un- 
wearied in works of beneficence. And not only 
is he himself thus prospered, but (what is far 
more important) many hearts which are refreshed 
by his bounty will overflow with thankfulness, 
and will give glory to God; a loving fellowship 
will spring up between the giver and the receiver; 


159 





and the spiritual life of each will be quickened 
and strengthened. 

[2. It has sometimes been questioned whether 
this promise, (vv. 8-10) is fully borne out by ob- 
servation and experience. Not to dwell, how- 
ever, upon the fact that the Apostle is in this place 
only laying down what might be expected from 
God’s power, and leaves undecided the question 
whether that power will always be put forth in 
every specific case, we may suggest that the Apos- 
tleis merely giving the general tendency and result 
of righteousness (Hodge). It will be, however, time 
enough to show that our passage will admit of ex- 
ceptions, when a case of failure has been produced. 

8. The power of all active beneficence in promot- 
ing the Church’s unity and common life.—Paul’s 
earnestness in the matter of this collection was 
quite disproportionate to its importance as an 
isolated fact. He was evidently looking far be- 
yond it to the kind feclings and fellowship which 
such a work was fitted to promote. There had 
been, and there still was, great danger of a rup- 
ture between the Jewish and Gentile Christians. 
Paul evidently anticipated much from this col- 
lection, in smoothing down any asperities which 
had already become apparent. 

4. It is evident that a community of goods 
(whatever it may have been) did not preserve 
the Church at Jerusalem from poverty and want. 
Clearly it had never been compulsory nor ab- 
solutely universal, and was only for the occasion 
onwhich so many strangers were in Jerusalem. 
As a requirement, it seems only to have been that 
each one should hold all that he had subject to 
the call of necessity. (See on Acts iv. 34-37). 
Probably then, and certainly ever since, the 
apostolic rule was, ‘‘not an absolute uniformity, 
but a mutual codperation and assistance.” (STan- 
LEY). 

εν The community of love laid down in this 
section would preserve the whole Church from 
want. In the great body there would be ““ αἷ- 
ways an all-sufficiency in all things,’”’ and withsuch 
a spirit it would be faithfully applied. 

6. The Apostle clearly distinguishes between 
spiritual and temporal blessings.—The Corinthians 
might sow the one and not reap the other. We 
may sow much love and self-sacrifice, and reap 
abundantly the reward of such a sowing in kind, 
i. e., in their spiritual results, but reap very lit- 
tle of pecuniary or temporal gain. ‘What Paul 
promised these Corinthians was: 1, the love of 
God (ver. 7); 2, a spirit abounding in every 
good work (ver. 8); thanksgiving on their behalf 
(vv. 11-13). Anoble harvest! but all spiritual.” 
(F. W. Ropertson). God might or might not 
give of His: infinite sufficiency and ability (ver. 
8), for their temporal wealth. ] 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


SrarKxe:—Ver. 1. Confidence and admonition 
may very properly exist together, the one in 
view of an honorable and upright character, and 
the other because many need a preparation for 
their duties.—Ver. 2. A good beginning is not 
always sure of a good ending; we must there- 
fore admonish one another and pray that we 
may continue diligent in every good work (1 
Thess. iii. 2)—Hzpiverr:—Commendable soli- 


100 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





citude to observe accuracy in all we say; and to 
fulfil all we engage to do; without this, our 
words are only vain boasting. Away with this! 
—Ver. 4. We should be careful to have good 
reasons when we praise another, otherwise both 
parties may only be brought to greater shame. 
—/bid: Support of the poor, and support of 
pastors. Plead and pray for them! Oh, if all 
who are in comfortable circumstances would but 
remember how much their doing good has to do 
with God’s blessing! Their ability to do good is 
His blessing, and they ought to be the hand by 
which He blesses others, only that they them- 
selves may be more blessed (vers. 6,9). The 
covetous man only betrays himself by pretending 
to give liberally; for he gives only a little ac- 
cording to his ability, and this with evident re- 
luctance and low motives.—Ver. 6. Every thing 
we have is from God; the more we have, the 
more readily, abundantly and joyfully should we 
communicate for the relief of others, with no ex- 
pectation of a reward. And yet it is not wrong 
to have an eye to those promises which are a 
token of God’s great love and readiness to help 
us in our weakness (Heb, x. 85; xi. 26).—Jbid: 
Alms given merely by commandment are a kind 
of forced sins, transferred and deposited to our 
account. Gifts bestowed with curses bring no 
blessings or reward.—Ver. 7. A generous love 
of our neighbor is like ripe clusters of grapes, 
whose sweet juices flow forth by their own force. 
It can scarcely be appealed to before its cheer- 
ful response is ready. Without such a love men 
must be hard pressed before they yield any thing, 
and the little that comes forth is soured by com- 
plaints and murmurings.—Ver. 8. HepInGeR:— 
Nothing bestowed upon Christ’s members is lost ; 
and yet look well that no sighs adhere to your 
gifts! If it does not properly belong to you, it 
cannot be acceptable. To offer what rightfully 
belongs to another, is very fitly called, skinning 
your neighbor and hanging his hide up in the 
temple for God.—Christian virtues are joined 
together like the links of a chain. He is a per- 
fect Christian who fails in no part of his duties. 
Ver. 9. Spener:—Genuine love is careful to be- 
stow its bounty upon such persons and in such a 
way that goodness shall not encourage wicked- 
ness; but the hand which freely scatters must 
not be fettered with too many scruples, if only 
the worthy are not overlooked. Blessed are the 
merciful whose care reaches to the soul as well 
as to the body, to eternity as well as to time 
(Matth. vy. 7).—Ver. 10. Hepincer :—The sower 
not unfrequently scatters on the soil what little 
seed he has, and with painful anxiety hopes for 
a plentiful harvest. Such a harvest God has 
promised to those who sow liberally (in well 
doing), and are moved by love to men and a de- 
sire to serve God.—Ver. 11. God is the true cen- 
tre from which all lines of blessing diverge, and 
in which all benevolent actions again converge 
in grateful thanksgivings.—Ver. 12. How much 
good springs from love! It preserves the life of 
Christ's members, and turns their hearts ir’o 
altars of incense where God is adored.—Ver. 
13. The confession of a true faith and the over- 
flowing of a genuine love are beautiful things, 
for which we have reason to rejoice and to praise 
the Lord.—Ver. 14, Those who receive kindness 








should heartily thank God for the spirit bestowed 
upon the giver, and pray that he may receive an 
abundant blessing.—Ver. 15. Let us never see or 
hear of a charitable work without rejoicing in it 
and praising God for it. 

Berens. Brpte:—Ver. 2. Whoever leaves 
what he must do to the last hour, will find him- 
self confused and his good work put to shame 
(the foolish virgins).—Ver. 8f. Satan endeavors 
to strangle our good purposes at the birth, and 
we should take care faithfully to finish what we 
have begun well. Every one is in danger during 
his religious course of becoming cold in heart; 
it is always well, therefore, when God sends 
some one to stimulate our zeal.—Ver. 5. If no- 
thing in the heart is pleasing to God, we may be 
sure that the outward act will have no blessing. 
—Ver. 6. God delights in what flows liberally 
from a loving heart.—Ver. 7. The Christian 
knows no joy without faith, or which proceeds 
not from grace. It is by the delight which the 
liberal man finds in giving, that God steals his 
heart and forces upon him a grace far richer 
than what he gave.—Ver. 8. In proportion as we 
apply to the poor those gifts with which Divine 
love has favored us will be the grace which we 
shall receive in their stead; only the returning 
stream will be the most abundant, that goodness 
and faithfulness may meet together.—Ver. 9. In 
scattering his blessings, the Christian must re- 
collect that though his heart should be open and 
unreserved, he should also proceed as carefully 
as possible, for the work of love should be wise. 
Even righteousness demands this. But it will 
be like a regular growth, in which there is no 
decay ; for as it is in harmony with the Divine 
nature, it must be eternal.—Ver. 10. God gives 
the seed, and He must give the harvest, but not 
immediately, for then we could not distinguish 
His several footsteps. When we openour hearts 
to God (by our alms) the blessings always return 
upon us in a thirty, sixty or an hundred fold in- 
crease of Christian graces.—Ver. 12, It is said 
that, ‘‘ Love is the fulfilling of the law;” and we 
here see that obedience to the second table re- 
acts upon the better fulfilment of the first, inas- 
much as it awakens a spirit of praise.—Ver. 15, 
Whoever recognizes and accepts of Christ asa 
gift, will be thankful and strive to live to the Di- 
vine glory. Each attribute of God has a ten- 
dency to produce in us something like itself; and 
as He freely gives to us, we also are led freely to 

ive. 
5 ΒΈΝΟΕΙ, :--οσ. 8. God gives us what we have, 
not so much that we may have it, but that we 
may do good. Every thing in life, even the best 
earned rewards, are seeds sown for a future 
harvest. 

Riecer:—Ver. 5. A gift will be a blessing, 
for the supply it affords, for the cheerful kind-* 
ness it displays, and for the thanksgiving of 


which it is the occasion.—When it is a matter οὗ. 


covetousness, it will be done penuriously and un- 
pleasantly, and will be received without pleasure 
or satisfaction.—Ver. 6. The figure of sowing 
and reaping is very appropriate to the work of 
charity. That which is scattered, is something 
which we look upon as needful for our support, 
but which will not be as profitable if it is hoard- 
ed up. We must not be anxious about wind and 


CHAP. IX. 1-15. 





weather, but trust rather to God’s providence 
than to our Gwn prudence. Much seed will doubt- 
less fall by the wayside, but that on the good 
soil will abundantly reward us for all we sowed. 
Ver. 8. God can turn to our advantage not 
only the increase of our worldly wealth, but 
every blessing of His daily providence. In this 
way He may give us health, peace, pious hus- 
bands and wives, pious children and faithful do- 
mestics, and make them an advantage to us. 
We often see those who are reluctant to do kind 
acts for their neighbors lose more by extrava- 
gant children and unfaithful servants, than would 
have formed a handsome contribution for the 
poor.—Vers. 11ff. Where we have true simpli- 
city of character, we are not particular in the 
enjoyment of what God gives us, but we are sa- 
tisfied and hopeful, even where we seem to be in 
want.—Ver. 15. Christ is indeed an unspeakable 
gift, but in Him is included the gospel, with all 
its power in the heart, and those works of cha- 
rity to which it prompts us, a supply for every 
want, an overcoming faith, a thankful spirit, the 
common fellowship of prayer which He creates, 
and the prospect of a harvest of blessings through 
all eternity. 

Hevusner:—Ver. 1. An enlightened Christian 
needs no long exposition of his duties.—Ver. 2. 
Even for the sake of a good example, it, may be 
a duty to give liberally.—Ver. 4. If a minister 
has done all within his power, and his people are 
without benevolence, theirs must be the reproach. 
Ver. 5. God’s blessing depends not upon the 
amount, but upon the spirit with which we give. 
Ver. 6. The principles on which we shall be 
blessed are: the more active we are in doing 
good, the greater will be our blessing; the more 
we are emptied of earthly things, the more we 
are filled with God, and vice versa. Worldly pru- 
dence says: Do not make yourself a beggar! but 
Christian prudence says: Give all that thou hast! 
Ver. 7. The value of our charities depends 
upon their being given from a pure heart. God’s 
great grace in the heart makes a glad heart.— 
Ver. 9. God can give abundantly, not only in 
earthly, but in spiritual things.—Ver. 12. The 
giving of alms is of an advantage even in the 
spiritual life; for it awakens and strengthens 
our faith in the reality of a Christian spirit in 
the church, and of course in the presence of God 
Himself, to help the poor through His children. 
When the heart of God’s professed people are 
unmerciful and severe toward others, it becomes 
hard and bitter, inclined to unbelief, and a dis- 
honor to our religion.—Ver. 14. A spirit of 
prayer is no slight recompense for doing good. 
Even those whom we never knew become in- 
teresting to us when we hear that Divine grace 
abounds in them. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 5. It is better to give to- 
day than to-morrow, for no one knows how long 
he will be able to give. Reason, indeed, always 
gives reluctantly, from fear of some possible mis- 
fortune in the future; but the Bible says: ‘‘Give 
a portion to seven, and even to eight, for thou 
knowest not what evil shall be upon the earth” 
(Eccles. xi. 2, comp. Prov. iii. 27, 28). God al- 
ways gives with a liberal hand; and if it is a 
blessing for us to give, let us not measure our 
alms with a penurious and covetous spirit. God 

11 


161 


--.» 


also cheerfully lets us have the best He has; and 
if our alms are a sacrifice of praise, let us not 
corrupt it with the leaven of covetousness, but 
accompany it with the sweet incense of a com- 
plete dedication of our own selves to God (Chap. 
viii. 5, Mal. i. 14).—Ver. 6. The giving of alms 
is itself a blessing, and of course the giver must 
be biessed. As the sun draws the water, and as 
the clouds give back in showers what they before 
received, (Eccles. xi. 3) so will God graciously 
return what we bestow (in His name and in His 
hand) although it sometimes may seem like cast- 
ing our bread upon the waters. A poor man 
gives only an insignificant mite, but it is a bless- 
ing, and he will have a harvest of blessings; 
blessings from God’s children, and blessings from 
our heavenly Father in this world and in the 
next. He who sows in blessings (giving in the 
Lord and to the Lord), shall reap also in bless- 
ings: He will hear many exclaim, ‘‘God reward 
you!” and ‘*Thank God!” and these shall rise 
up before God with his alms, and spring up in 
many full ears to form his harvest wreath in 
another, and even in the present world. If those 
who receive our gifts should be unthankful, and 
should have no share in our blessing, God is faith- 
ful to remember every seed sown, and to make 
it fruitful in blessings. Only see to it, there- 
fore, that everything you sow is a bounty and not 
a covetousness, and then give over all care about 
the harvest, to the Lord who will not fail to make 
it exceedingly abundant !—Ver. 10. We have the 
same God in the kingdom of grace as in the king- 
dom of nature. In the latter our Lord once 
asked his disciples, ‘‘Lacked ye anything?” and 
they replied, ‘‘Nothing!” (Luke xxii. 85). In 
the former also we may be sure that all cheerful 
givers, when asked, ‘‘ Have you ever been impo- 
verished by your scattering?” will glorify that 
Lord who has taken upon Himself the debts of 
all His poor (Prov. xix. 17), by answering: 
‘‘Never; we have always had the blessing Paul 
promised the Corinthians.”—Just as a citizen 
shows his subjection to the civil law by a con- 
scientious payment of all his legal assessments, 
so a Christian shows that his confession is sub- 
ject to the gospel when he cheerfully assists in 
the collection of all church dues.—Ver. 14. The 
longing which God’s people sometimes feel in 
every part of the general church on earth to en- 
joy each others’ fellowship is not extinguished 
even if they have no prospect of meeting in the 
flesh, but we instinctively yearn for a fellowship 
face to face in the mansions of the eternal 
city. 

[Srantey:—The Apostle presses upon them 
(1) speed, vv. 1-5; (2) readiness, vv. 6-7; (8) 
bounty, vv. 8-16. A CrarKe: ‘The Apostle 
enumerates the good effects which would be pro- 
duced by their liberal alms-giving: 1. The wants 
of the saints would be supplied; 2. many thanks- 
givings would thereby be rendered unto God; 3. 
the Corinthians would thereby give proof of 
their subjection to the Gospel; and 4. the pray- 
ers of those relieved will ascend up to God in 
behalf of their benefactors.” See a Sermon of 
Dr. Barrow on the passage from the Psalms 
quoted in ver. 9, in which the subject of ““ Bounty 
to the Poor,”’ would seem to be exhausted ( Works 
Vol, 1, Ser. 31)]. 


162 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


---- ---. 





--- -, --ῷ. 





XV.—DEFENCE OF HIS APOSTOLIC ENERGY, POWERS AND ACTS AGAINST THE AS- 
SAULTS OF HIS ARROGANT OPPONENTS. 


CuarprerR X. 1-18. 


Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who in 
resence [indeed] am base [lowly] among you, but being absent am bold toward you: 
2 But I beseech [entreat] you, that I may not be bold when I am present with that 
confidence, wherewith I think to be bold against some, which think of us as if we 
walked according to the flesh. Tor though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after 
the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare’ are not carnal, but mighty through God 
to the pulling down of strong holds:) Casting down imaginations, [reasonings, λυγίσο 
μοὺς and every high thing that exalteth itself [is raised, ἐπαιρόμενον] against the 
knowledge of God, and bringing ivuto captivity every thought [every thought into 
6 captivity] to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all dis- 
obedience, [every failure in obedience, παραχοήν] when your obedience is fulfilled. 
7 Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? If any man trust to [in] him- 
self that he is Christ’s, let him of himself think [conclude, λογιζέσθω] this again, that, 
8 as he is Christ’s, even so are we Christ’s [om. Christ’s].?_ For though [even if, 
ἐάν τε] 1 should boast somewhat more [abundantly, περισσότερον] of our author- 
ity, which the Lord hath given us‘ for edification, and not for your destruction, I 
9 should not be ashamed: That I may not seem as if I would terrify you by letters: 
10 For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, 
11 and his speech contemptible. Let such a one think this, that, such as we are in werd 
by letters when we are absent, such will we be [are we] also in deed when we are 
12 present. For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with 
some that commend themse'ves: but they, measuring themselves by [among, ἐν] them- 
13 selves, and comparing themselyes among [with] themselves, are not wise. But we® 
will not boasw’ of things without owr measure, [boast without measure, εἰς τὰ ἄμετρα] 
but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed [apportioned] to 
14 us, a measure to reach even unto you. For we stretch not ourselves beyond our mea- 
sure, as though® we reached not unto you: for we are come [came foremost, ἐφθάσα- 
15 μεν} as far as to you also in preaching the gospel of Christ. Not boasting of things 
without owr measure [boasting without measure], that is, of other men’s labors; but 
having hope, when your faith is increased, [that as your faith increases, αὐξανομένης 
having hope, when your faith is increased, that [as your faith increases, αὐξανομένης 
that] we shall be enlarged by you [among you, ἐν 5%] according to our rule abund- 
16 antly, To preach the gospel in the regions [as far as the parts, εἰς τὰ ὑπερέχεινα] beyond 
17 you, and not to boast in another man’s line of things made ready to our hand. But 
18 he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. For not he that commendeth himself is 
approved, but whom the Lord commendeth. 


Ou co 


1 Ver. 4.—Rec. has στρατείας, but its authority is feeble. [Internal evidence would seem strong in favor of στρατείας 
both here and in 1 Tim, i. 18, for ordinarily (though by no means uniformly) it is used for military service or warfare, 
while στρατιά signifies rather an army; but they are often used interchangeably, and the external evidence against it is 
too strong to be forsaken (Tisch.). Lachm. however (sustained only by Cod. B.) adopts it.] ἢ 

2 γεγ, 7.--θο, has χριστοῦ after ἡμεῖς τ but it is thrown out by the majority of the best MSS. [Tisch. after rejecting 
it in ed. 3d, restores it in ed. 7th with the remark: “at ut molestum omnino omissum videtur: addidisse quemquam viz 
credibile videtur.’ And yet the documentary evidence against it (B. C. Ὁ. (1st hand) F. G@. Sin. many cursives, Vulg. Goth, 
Syr. Arm. with most of the ancient expositors) is very strong. ] 

8 Ver. 8.—The predominance of evidence is in favor of τε after καὶ; it is easier to conceive of its omission than of its 
insertion. On the other hand καὶ before περισσότερον has the weight of authority against it, and it is probably a supple- 
mentary addition. (Tisch. now restores it and thinks it more likely to have been omitted than added by a foreign hand.) 

* Ver, 8.—ypiv after κύριος is uncertain. It might have seemed superfluous after ἡμῶν, and yet very appropriate 
after ἔδωκεν, The best MSS. do not have it. 

§ Ver. 10.---ἰ ἐπιστολαὶ is placed before μέν by Lachm. after Codd. B. and Sin.]. φησίν is better sustained than φασιν: 
it is also the more difficult reading. 

© Ver. 12, 13.—ob συνιοῦσιν' ἡμεῖς δὲ are thrown out by a number of critics, but on the sole authority of Occidental 
MSS., some of which have ἡμεῖς δὲ, although these last words seem like an incomplete restoration when they stand 
alone. The transcriber’s eye easily passed from οὐ before σὺν to οὐχ after ἡμεῖς δὲ. and it was difficult to explain the 
passage without omitting these words. See critical remarks [and Stanley’s extended discussion.] 

7 Ver. 19, -οκαυχησόμεθα has satisfactory evidence in its favor; and is neither to be left out nor exchanged for 
καυχώμεθα nor καυχώμενοι. 

Ver. 14.—Lachm. has ὡς yap instead of οὐ γὰρ ὡς, but his authorities are weak [only Cod. B. and two very recent 
cursives. As he plaees the mark of interrogation after ἑαντόνς, the sense remains the same.| 





CHAP. X. 1-18. 


163 





EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


In passing to a new section (dé), the tone of 
the Apostle’s discourse becomes much altered. 
[‘‘The conciliatory and affectionate strain of 
entreaty which pervaded the first part, is ex- 
changed for that of stern command, and almost 
menace: there is still the same expression of de- 
yotion to the Corinthian Church; but it is mixed 
with a language of sarcasm and irony which has 
parallels in the First Epistle, but none up to this 
point in the Second. With this change in the 
general tone agrees also the change in details. 
Instead of the almost constant use of the first 
person plural, he here almost invariably (and in 
some instances with unusual emphasis) employs 
the first person singular; the digressions no 
longer go off to general topics, but revolve more 
closely round himself; the Corinthians are no 
longer commended for their penitent zeal, but 
rebuked for their want both of love and peni- 
tence. The confident hopes which he had ex- 
pressed for the future are exchanged for the 
most gloomy forebodings. This change is not to 
be accounted for by supposing this section to bea 
distinct fragment between his First and Second 
Epistles; for, after all, the differences between 
the different parts are no greater than those be- 
tween other portions of his writings: nor by 
supposing that he is addressing a different por- 
tion of the Corinthian congregation, for no inti- 
mation of this is given; but it is possible that 
some considerable pause, either of time or 
thought, now took place, during which addi- 
tional news or recollections of an unfavorable 
character came before him, and gave a new turn 
to his discourse. As the time drew near also in 
which he was to visit and test his apostolic 
power among them, he was perhaps haunted by 
the fear that he should have to visit them in an- 
ger and not in love. Such a feeling is the basis 
of this, as that of gratitude was the basis of the 
first portion of the Epistle. It is from this that 
he starts (x. 1-7), from this the digressions fly 
off (x. 12; xii. 10), and to this his conclusion 
returns (xii.11; xiii. 13). Sranuey (abridged) ]. 
His object now is to vindicate his Apostolic cha- 
racter and authority against those ill-disposed 
and arrogant opponents who had made light of 
them. The tendency of what he says is still to 
draw off the Church, with which he was anxious 
to deal tenderly, from those antagonists on whom 
he had determined to exert the Apostolic powers 
they had depreciated. 

Voers. 1-56. Now I Paul myself, beseech 
you by the meekness and gentleness of 
Christ, who in presence, indeed, am 
lowly among you, but being absent am 
bold toward you (ver. 1).—[In no other part 
of his Epistles has he made his individua- 
lity so prominent. He usually says, ‘‘I Paul,” 
(Gal. v. 2; Eph. iii. 1; Philem. 19), or uses 
simply the first person (singular or plural) of 
some verb]. Here αὐτός is added, and by way 
of emphasisis placed at the head of the sentence. 
It should be construed neither in the sense of 
ultro (of my own accord), nor in that of idem 
(always the same) in opposition to those who re- 
proached him that he had been fickle or inconsis- 


tent in his conduct, nor in contrast with those 
who had charge of the collection, with the poor 
saints who were to be relieved, with his calum- 
niators, or with him who hitherto had been as- 
sociated with him in the composition of the Epis- 
tle (chap. i. 1). With respect to this last sug- 
gestion, we have nothing in the remainder of the 
Epistle which indicates that the Apostle wished 
to make prominent that he was sustaining any 
new relation to them, or that he was now more 
than before addressing the Corinthians with his 
own hand or especially authenticating what he 
was about to write. The word has reference 
rather to the prayer in ver. 2, which is brought 
out in a somewhat gentler form by the exhorta- 
tion in ver. 1, and it relates to what is said in 
the relative sentence in ver. 1, as if he would 
say: I myself admonish and pray you; even I, 
who in personal appearance am so mean among 
you, but when absent am so bold toward you; 2. 
e., even I who, according to the disparaging 
insinuations of my opponents, (for these are 
evidently aimed at), am bold only when at a 
distance, and so submissive (cringing, faint- 
hearted) when personally present with you, now 
exhort and pray you, to save me by your con- 
duct the necessity of being bold and overbearing 
when I shall be present with you. With the 
words ἐγὼ Παῦλος, on which the main emphasis 
should be placed, he meets them in that Aposto- 
lic and personal character which was so familiar 
to them, to which they owed so much, and on 
which his admonition now depended for all its 
power. He strengthens this, however, by the 
addition: by the meekness and gentleness (πραό- 
της Kae ἐπιεικεία) of Christ. This gentleness and 
benignity or mildness (Acts xxiv. 4) of Christ 
(comp. Matth. xi. 29f.; Isa. xlvil. 2f.), ought 
to move them to comply with his exhortation. 
As this was the ordinary spirit and manner of 
Christ, they ought to see that Christ’s Apostles 
might also be gentle, and they should not make 
it necessary for him to proceed against them 
with severity. Ewald takes it as an admonition 
to the Corinthians, that they should not, like his 
opponents mistake for weakness that meekness 
and humility which he carefully copied in all his 
conduct from the example of Christ. Neither 
does the scope of the passage nor analogy require 
that we should construe dra in the sense of a so- 
lemn protestation (Osiander). Διά with a genit. 
often indicates the means or accompaniments ; 
as if the action were passing through them, 
and receiving a peculiar coloring from the me- 
dium. Paul’s entreaty is here supposed to ac- 
quire a special tenderness by being διὰ τῆς πρᾳότ. 
k. ἐπιεικ. [Jeur, 3 905.3 B. 1]. The distinction 
between πραότης and ἐπιείκεια, according to Me- 
lancthon, consists in this: the former means non 
temere irasci, and the latter facile placari. Ben- 
gel makes the former virtus magis absoluta (wil- 
| lingness to suffer and to forgive), and the latter 
magis refertur ad alios. According to Meyer the 

contrast is between what was actually expe- 

rienced and what was strictly just. HErUBNER: 

Meekness endures the pain, but gentleness cor- 

rects the faults of others with forbearance. 

[WEBSTER AND WILKINSON say that ““πραότ. is 

natural mildness of disposition; émeeck. a habit 

arising from considerateness, exemplified by our 








104 THE SECOND EPISTLE 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. — 


EE “πα 


Lord in Luke ix. 56, and Matth. xxvi. 41.” 
Comp. Trexcu, Synn., First Part, pp. 207-10]. 
The idea (of Riichert) that Paul felt especially 
touched by the insinuation contained in the re- 
lative sentence, inasmuch as he was conscious 
that notwithstfinding all his vehemence he was 
really deficient in personal courage, must have 
originated in a sad misapprehension of the Apos- 
tle’s character as presented in his life and Epis- 
tles. Those opponents who urged this objection 
in order to weaken the impression which his 
severe reproofs had produced, had found a 
plausible reason for their assertion in the fact 
that, for fear of aggravating the evil, he had 
spoken of some things within the Church itself 
with a degree of hesitation. It is possible, too, 
that after his second visit to Corinth (and before 
our first Epistle) the state of things had become 
so much worse, that he had felt obliged to write 
with moreseverity than he had displayed when he 
was among them (Meyer). It would be hardly 
correct to go back as far as his first visit among 
them (1 Cor. ii. 3), for the observation of his 
opponents had probably been made at some later 
period. But the matter on which the Apostle 
exhorts his readers is contained in the prayer 
(δέομαί) which follows in ver. 2.—But I pray 
that I may not when present have to be 
bold with that confidence with which I 
think to be bold against some.—[By 
translating wapax. of ver. 1, and δέομ of ver. 2, 
by the same word (beseech) our common version 
fails to preserve the growing earnestness indi- 
cated by the latter word. For a similar inter- 
change of these words see chap. v. 20, 21; vi. 1; 
viii. 4]. The dé not only indicates that he was 
taking up again what had gone before, but it in- 
troduces a contrast to the sentence implied in the 
relative sentence. The prayer itself, as the con- 
text and the want of the accusative of the object 
shows, was directed not to God (for then παρα- 
καλῶ in ver. 1 would have no significance) but to 
the Corinthians. [‘‘The terms in which this is 





expressed are taken from the description which 
the detractors were accustomed to give of him 
(ver. 1), which, although apparently incidental, 
is the key note of allthat follows, in which the ideas 
ταπειν. and Japp. in various turns of thought and 
phraseology continually and prominently recur.” 
Sraniey.| The article τό serves to make the in- 
finitive sentence especially prominent. Iapér cor- 
responds in signification with εἰς πρόζωπον in ver. 
1. The thing prayed for is, that they would not 
allow it to become necessary for him to be bold 
among them. The πεποίϑησις was that confi- 
dence in his official authority and rights which 
was connected with good conscience, and whose 
dependence was indeed upon God, but need not 
be understood here. Aoyifouar is not in the pas- 
sive (I am reckoned) to express the way in which 
he was estimated by his opponents (Luther). 
Beza not only regards it as a passive, but takes 
τολμῆσαι as a preterite, which, however, would | 
have called for some additional word (adv) to 
imply this (comp. Meyer). It denotes here, as it 
often does in Euripides and Herodotus, the in- 
tention, the design or determination of the mind. 
Nog etree thinks the word does not imply a 
ull or settled purpose. Paul ‘said not ‘where- 
with I am prepared,’ but ‘wherewith I think,’ 


for he had not yet resolved upon this, though 

his opponents had given him occasion enough.” 

Bloomfield notices a paronomasia in λογίζομαι 

and λογιζομένους, which if introduced into Eng- 
lish might perhaps be best expressed by reckon]. 

As the case is different with λογιζομένους, the 
word there has the meaning of, to reckon for, or 
as something. ’Eri τινας should be connected not 
with ϑαῤῥῆσαι but with τολμῆσαι. which must 
here be taken absolutely and in the sense of, to 
have courage, to be resolute, to step forth boldly 

(as in Homer, Pindar, the tragic poets and 
Thucydides), [It has also something of the 
signification, to venture, to have the heart, as if 
the agent endured or suffered something, because 
he acted in spite of natural feeling, or under great 
difficulties. This idea may be traced in the use of 
the word here].—namely, those who think 
of us as if we walked according to the 
flesh. (ver. 2 6.)—He does not name these per- 
sons, but he immediately characterizes them from 
the wayin which they were in the habit of judging 
him. Ὥς is here used as in 1 Cor. iv. 1. [Tlepe- 
πατοῦντες etymologically signifies, to walk about, 
hither and thither, and Stanley thinks that we 
have here a reference to this original meaning]. 

Κατὰ σάρκα περιπατεῖν here signifies, a course of 

conduct, characterized by the σάρξ (7. e., by the 
psychic-corporeal life), destitute of a spiritual 
character, and not merely dependent upon exter- 
nal influences, and of course feeble, but in posi- 
tive antagonism to the spirit, and of course sin- 
ful; 7.e., the organ and principle of sin (Beck, 
Christl., Lehrwiss, p. 278). The idea of weak- 
ness probably predominates, but the expression 
describes a course of conduct determined by the 
fear of men, or the desire of pleasing men, and 
hence a personal bearing disgraced by cowardice 
or servility (ταπεινός). The human nature re~ 
ferred to was therefore one enfeebled, not merely 
from the want of Divine support, but from sin 
(comp. on 1 Cor. xii. 17).—For though we 
walk in the flesh, we do not make war 
according to the flesh (ver. 3).—A reason 
is here given for the prayer in ver. 2, and at the 
same time he exonerates himself from what had 
been charged upon him by his opponents (τοὺς 
λογιζ.---περιπατοῦντας). I beg of you not to al» 
low me to be placed in such circumstances 
that I shall’be obliged to venture on an un- 
pleasant part when I shall be present with you. 
For although we are walking in the flesh, we 
do not take the field, or carry on war accord- 
ing to the flesh, ἡ. ¢., we are not determined 
by fleshly considerations. as those persons 
imagine. Στρατεύεσϑαι (1 Cor. ix. 7), understood 
in the more comprehensive sense implied by its 
contrast with περιπατεῖν, designates the Apostles’ 
whole ministry in its numerous conflicts with 
hostile powers, under the figure of a warfare. 

Comp. ii. 14; 1 Tim. i. 18. The emphasis lies 
upon the two contrasted prepositions ἐν and κατά. 

The flesh (cap) is indeed the sphere in whick 
we move, ἢ. e. the psychical and corporeal life 
with all its sinful infirmities is the instrument by 
which and the department in which we act 
(comp. ζῶ ἐν σαρκί in Gal. 11. 20), but it is not 
the influence which determines our movements.” 

The reason for this assertionis given in yer. 4. 

—For the weapons of our warfare are not 








CHAP. X. 1-18. 





carnal but mighty before God for the 
pulling down of strong holds.—The Apos- 
tle here describes the kind of weapons he used, 
ἃ. 6. the means by which he carried on his minis- 
try (ὅπλα chap. vi. 7) in contrast with those of 
his adversaries. As his weapons bore not the 
stamp of the flesh, there was no reason for say- 
ing that his action as a Christian warrior was 
under the direction of the flesh. W. F. Besser: 
«The text must certainly give a strong testimony 
against the mingling of ecclesiastical authority 
with the civil power of the sword (comp. Augsb. 
Conf. p. 64, Art. of Smale. p. 344).”——The Apos- 
tle brings into positive contrast with the carnal 
(σαρκικά, comp. i. 12) not the spiritual (rvevuu- 
rixa) but the mighty in God’s sight (δυνατὰ τῷ 
vec). The fleshly is also that which is feeble, 
and especially when it is in conflict with the 
world for the cause of God, it is entirely power- 
less. Σαρκικός however is not precisely equiva- 
lent to, feeble, but the only thing which in this 
case is powerful is that which proceeds from, 
aud bears the impress of the Spirit. For a notice 
of the spiritual panoply see Eph. vi. 11ff. Simi- 
lar contrasts may be found in 2 Chron. xxxii. 8; 
Isa. xxxi. 3; Ps. Ixxxviii. 39. Power is directly 
related to spirit also in 1 Cor. ii. 4; Lukei. 17. 
Avvara is more particularly defined by τῷ Ved to 
mean that which is powerful in God’s esteem, 
before God. Comp. ἀστεῖος τῷ ϑεῷ in Acts vii. 
20, and also Jonah iii. 3. And yet the phrase is 
not intended to be simply a superlative, but to 
signify the truth or the reality (Osiander: accep- 
table to God) of the power. Neander: mighty, 
because God gave them, and overthrows strong 
holds by means of them. In opposition to the 
explanation which makes this phrase mean: 
through or for God, it may be said that the 
former would be superfluous, being self-evident; 
and although the latter might seem appropriate 
in the sense of: to the honor, or, for the use of 
God, (i. e. to show forth his power) there is no- 
thing in the context to call for such a remark.*— 
The end which these weapons were to subserve, 
and to which they were adapted, is announced 
in πρὸς καϑαίρεσιν ὀχυρωμάτων. They are the in- 
strumentalities by which the κόσμος, or its ἄρχων, 
the god of this world (τοῦ αἰῶνος chap. iv. 4), 
endeavors to obstruct the progress of God’s cause 
and the work of salvation. Oyvpwudra signifies 
castles or fortresses. [They are things intended 
to serve in the mind as strong holds do in war- 
fare. Comp. Prov. xxi. 22. Stanley (p. 500) 
thinks that the peculiar imagery here used was 
suggested by the Mithridatic and Piratical wars 
which took place in Cilicia; the latter only 60 
years before the Apostles’ birth. One hundred 
and twenty such strong holds are said to have 


{* This seems hardly conclusive, for the Apostle might 
very properly call attention to the agency of God through 
which his weapons were so powerful. Is there any greater 
call for his mere assertion that his weapons were power- 
ful in God’s sight (7.e. truly)? The ancient Greek Exposi- 
tors (whose opinions on such a question are entitled to 
weight, favor the meaning given in our common version, 
as 6. g. Chrys.: “Paul here refers the whole power to God— 
he says not we are mighty, but our weapons are mighty 
through God.” 80 also Bloomfield, Conybeare and Stanley 
(in his translation). Wordsworth less appropriately renders 
the phrase, God-ward in contrast with man-ward or in the 
direction of, in respect to, men. He refers to Acts vii. 20. 
Comp. Jzxr, 2 611, b.] 











165 





been in existence and to have been taken in the 
war with these pirates. Each word here used 
strikingly carries out the metaphor]. The way 
in which this overthrow was effected is more 
particularly described in ver. 5.— Casting 
down reasonings and every lofty thing 
which is erected against the knowledge 
of God.—As the first and most prominent of 
these strong holds, he mentions λογισμοίνς, intel- 
lectual bulwarks which were probably not so 
much projects or hostile plans as uneyangelical 
thoughts or fixed conclusions of human (Hellen- 


‘istic or Judaistic) philosophy, in direct opposi- 


tion to the Christian faith, 1 Cor. iii. 20. [Our 
English ‘‘imaginations”’ is hardly the proper word 
here. The idea is rather ‘‘reasonings.” It re- 
fers to theoretic subtilties or argumentations]. 
Comp. the contrasted γνῶσις tov ϑεοῦ. Ἰζαϑαιρ- 
οὔντες is anacoluthic; comp. chap. ix. 11. To 
connect it with ver. 3 so as to make ver. 4 a 
parenthesis, seems not only unnecessary but un- 
allowable inasmuch as ver. 4 is essentially a 
continuation of the main thought, and καϑαιροῦ- 
vtec is most naturally referred back to καϑαίρεσιν. 
[As all the prominent words of this passage are 
evidently military we must suppose the allusion 
in καϑαίρέω was to the use of the ‘‘ crow” which 
pulled (not cast) down the walls or towers of an 
enemy. Stanley gives several instances of such 
a use of the word in classic writers. (See also 
Cobbin)]. In καὶ πᾶν ὕψωιια, etc., (every high 
thing, etc.) he reverts to the metaphor he had 
left in λογισμοὺς and which had been only hinted 
at in καϑαιροῦντες. Ὕψωμα signifies an elevation, 
something made high, as a tower, wall or any- 
thing of the kind. In sense it is much the same 
as οχυρώματα in ver. 4 i. 6. it is something by 
which the enemy strives to maintain his ground. 
By πᾶν it becomes a general term in which even 
the λογισμοί are included, and it then signifies 
every kind of human greatness which could be 
made use of in such a warfare; according to Osi- 
ander, wisdom, eloquence, power, righteousness, 
honor, wealth.—Agreeably to the metaphor, ἐπαι- 
ρόμενον [opposite of καϑαιρ.} should be construed 
not inthe middle but passive voice. That against 
which these high things were erected, and whose 
progress, and ascendency was thus to be pre- 
vented, was the knowledge of God (γνῶσις τοῦ 
Veov); not (subjectively) as it existed in the 
minds of his opponents, and was opposed by the 
darkness of human wisdom, but objectively, 
something which met men in common life, and 
called forth their opposition: that revelation of 
the plan and work of salvation, in which Christ 
was proclaimed and God was manifested in 
Christ. In addition to the negative acts by which 
the fortresses obstructing the progress of Divine 
knowledge were overthrown, we have those which 
were positive, when the Apostle adds,—and 
bringing every thought into captivity to 
the obedience of Christ. (ver.5d.)-—When the 
enemy is thus captured, the victory must be com- 
plete. This enemy is πᾶν νόημα; which is here 
not the same as design, and then to be joined 
with εἰς τὴν ὑπακοὴν, so as to mean every design 
in opposition to the obedience, efc., for even if wo 
do not take into consideration the want of ti-¢ 
article (rd), and the use of εἰς instead of the fore- 
going κατά, we should find that νόημα in this 


166 THE SECOND EPISTLE 


o— 


sense would be no proper object of captivity, and 
that a much better sense would be afforded by 
supposing τὴν ὑπακοήν the fortress to which they 
were carried. Thus obedience was as it were 
the place to which the captive enemy was brought 
and hence we have εἰς instead of a dative, as in 
Rom. vii. 23. As the intellectual element predo- 
minates in the whole context, we have no reason 
to take νόημα in the sense of intention [Alford] 
or disposition; and still less of the spiritual mind 
itself which exercises thought, 7. 6. the under- 
standing; Luther: all human reason.* This 
obedience of Christ, in the sense of a subjection 
to Christ, is in other passages called the obe- 
dience of faith Rom. i. 5; xv. 18. The idea is: 
to bring every thought or understanding which 
is otherwise opposed to Christ, into subjection to 
Him. Παρακοή and brakof# are contrasted in ver. 
6. [The former signifies (strictly) a failing to 
hear or a hearing amiss, and so a want of obe- 
dience; the latter a listening to authority, and 
so a subjection to another. See Wresster, Synn. 
p. 225, also Trencu, Synn. 2d Ser. p. 73.] ΑἹ- 
though the Apostle does not entirely forsake the 
line of thought which he had pursued in the 
preceding paragraph, ὦ. e., of contention gene- 
rally with hostile powers, he now returns ‘more 
decidedly to the affairs of the Corinthian Church. 
And having in a readiness to punish 
every failure in obedience when your 
obedience shall have been fulfilled (ver. 
6)..—He evidently regarded that Church as spe- 
cially subject to his Apostolical authority, and it 
was only in their return to him that he expected 
the completion (πληρωϑῇ) of their obedience to 
Christ. Upon that obedience he made to depend 
the time in which he should exercise his disci- 
plinary power upon those Judaistic corrupters 
who might persist in opposing his authority. 
For this he was even then ready (ἐν ἑτοίμω ἔχειν 
=in promptu habere), and he was only waiting 
for the completion of the Church’s obedience. 
Comp. chap. ii. 1; xiii. 10. <A delicate hint 
seems here conveyed that he would make a dis- 
tinction between these seducers and those who 
had been seduced; and an admonition is ex- 
pressed that the latter would do well by their 
entire submission to his instructions, to escape 
the punishment he was about to inflict (perhaps 
excommunication, or at least something which 
would be a proof of his miraculous powers as an 
Apostle) on those who might continue disobe- 
dient. It would be incorrect to understand this 
fulfilment of their obedience as referring to 
the Apostle’s call for a collection. 


might suggest that he was not in earnest in the 
matter (comp. Osiander [also Jelf, ὃ 622, 27). 


(* This is one of those passages which became so important 
in the controversy with Rationalism. The etymological 
construction of the word is certainly in favor of the mean- 
ing: a thought, an intellectual perception as it is formed in 
the mind; and yet a very extensive usage in classic writers 
favors the meaning, the faculty of the understandiug, or even 
the mind itself, The sense, too, if we adopt this meaning, 


would be highly appropriate; for while it is ihe λογισμοὶ, 
which were demolished, the mind itself which once enter- 
tained them, is here supposed to be taken captive to the 
obedience of Christ. We are compelled, however, by the 
¢ anection which deals entirely with the products of human 


action against Divine k owledge, to adopt the etymological 
siguificatiun). 


He says that | 
he was in readiness, in opposition to those who 


TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





[Stanley’s paraphrase well expresses the idea of 
this passage: “1 conjure you not to compel me 
to break the bounds of the gentle and forgiving 
character of Christ. But be assured that, if I 
do exercise when I am present, the authority 
which some think I shall never venture to exer- 
cise but at a distance, it will be a real authority. 
I shall come against you like a mighty conqueror, 
though with weapons, not of earthly, but of hea- 
venly warfare; and every alien thought and im- 
agination shall fall before me, like fortresses 
before a victorious army, and shall be reduced to 
submission, like captive hands: and those who 
resist shall be punished like the last remnants of 
a defeated insurrection. To effect all this, I wait 
only till I am assured of your submission, that I 
may not confound the innocent with the guilty, 
the dupes with the deceivers.” He speaks as if 
his opponents were not members of the Corinthian 
Church, but foreign to it; and hence as if they 
were not addressed in this epistle, and were only 
awaiting the obedience of the Corinthians that 
he might exercise his vengeance on them]. 
Vers. 7-11. In this passage the Apostle main- 
tains that his relations to Christ were of an inti- 
mate nature, in opposition to his opponents, who 
prefessed that they alone stood in such relations ; 
and he adds the assurance that when he should 
come to Corinth in person, and not merely by 
his letters, as they asserted, he would give them 
a proof of his Apostolical authority—Do ye 
look on things after the outward appear- 
ance ? (ver. 7a)—The way in which we interpret 
this sentence must depend upon the sense we give 
to τὰ κατὰ πρόσωπον. If it means things lying in 
sight before their eyes, from which the Corin- 
thians might recognize, if they were disposed to 
do so, his Apostolical dignity, the idea would be 
that he was calling upon them to attend more 
carefully to things obviously before them. In 
this case βλέπετε would be construed in the im- 
perative [: Look at what is before your own 
eyes]. The analogy of other passages, however, 
would require that this verb should have stood at 
the head of the sentence, comp. 1 Cor. i. 26; x.18; 
Phil. iii. 2. If that expression, however, means 
that which is merely apparent, it may refer to 
something in his opponents which gave them an 
external advantage; or to something external in 
the Apostle himself, which made the Corinthians 
postpone him to them. In this case, βλέπετε 
must be construed in the indicative, either as a 
direct assertion, and a severe reproach to them 
es Stanley], or as a question (with Theo-. 
oret, Erasmus, Meyer [Alford, Hodge, and our 
English A. V.]) in accordance with the lively 
and earnest spirit of the general passage. The 
context (vers. 1-10), is certainly in favor of re- 
ferring the expression to the Apostle himself. 
[In this case, however, many think that βλέπετε 
would be quite as much required at the com- 
mencement of the sentence, and to be preceded by 
a τί or some similar word. The signification 
finally attained is much the same, whether the 
indicative is taken annunciatively or interroga- 
tively. Adopting the latter as the most proba- 
ble, the Apestle] intended to speak of his out- 
ward manner, which, when he was at Corinth, 
had not been bold or confident, and hence had 
| afforded ill-disposed persons an occasion for 











CHAP. X. 1-18. 





suspecting him of weakness and timidity. The 
question was directed not to his principal antago- 
nists, but to the Church itself; at least, to that 
portion which had listened to the pretensions of 
these opponents. In the next verse, however, he 
changes his address and fixes his eye upon these 
opponents themselves.—If any man trusts in 
himself that he is Christ’s, let him con- 
clude this again of himself, that as he is 
Christ’s, so also are we (ver. 70). The word 
ἑαυτῷ makes the personal vanity and self-conceit 
of such a confidence very prominent, inasmuch 
as it is a confidence in one’s own self. In 
χριστοῦ εἶναι we have the idea of belonging to 
Christ, but the context does not imply that this 
was in the sense of kindred (perhaps through 
James), or of a particular fellowship with Peter; 
nor does it refer merely to the general relation- 
ship of all believers, but to the special ownership 
implied in δοῦλος (which indeed a number of au- 
thorities add to the reading of this passage, 
though it is evidently a gloss), or διάκονος χρισ- 
τοῦ (chap. xi. 23), To this ἑαυτῷ corresponds 
ἀφ᾽ (Lachmann é¢’—in, though the reading is not 
sufficiently authenticated) ἑαυτοῦ, which is made 
emphatic by πάλιν, again (not, on the ocher hand). 
But this phrase, of his own self, may mean either, 
proceeding from himself, 1. e., referring to what 
he might see of himself, inasmuch as he would 
find the same evidences of this being Christ’s in 
Paul as in himself; or by himself, without any 
suggestion or assistance from the Apostle; as if 
the meaning were: we should expect that those 
who assume such high grounds with respect to 
themselves, would need no suggestions from 
others, but that they would apply the same 
principles and come to a correct conclusion 
here. This last explanation seems the more 
probable. The first reminds us of the supposed 
Christ-party in Corinth which claimed a special 
relation to Christ on account of their Jewish 
descent (comp. chap. xi. 22), or on account of 
some intercourse with him by mysterious visions, 
such as are referred to in chap. xii. 1ff.; and 
according to it, the Apostle was maintaining that 
they would find the same marks of intimacy with 
Christ im him. But the alleged facts are altoge- 
ther too uncertain to exercise any influence upon 
our exposition. There is no necessity of assuming 
that Paul had any where reference in Χριστοῦ 
εἶναι to such a party or its leaders, and the ut- 
most that we can infer from what is here said is 
that he might possibly have some allusion to the 
name of that party. Neander thinks that Paul 
must have referred here to some opponents who 
claimed to belong exclusively to Christ on ac- 
count of having received their Christianity di- 
rectly from the Apostles of the original Church. 
The claim of these persons, whatever it might 
be, Paul met with the assertion that he also 
could speak of himself in the same terms in 
which those earliest Apostles said they were 
Christ’s. The words, as he himself is, so also are we, 
are intended to be a conciliatory and a moderate 
presentation of his true claims. When he 
speaks unreservedly and tells the whole truth 
on this subject, he goes beyond what is implied 
in such a comparison (chap. xi. 23). Hi τις 
(delicately, instead of ὅστις) is not necessarily 
egainst the idea that his opponents were proba- 








167 


—-= 


bly a number of persons. The equality or the 
title to an equality of position which he had 
claimed in ver. 7, he makes clear in ver. 8, by 
adding—For even if I should boast some- 
what more abundantly of the power 
which the Lord gave us for edification 
and not for your destruction, I should not 
be put to shame.—He means to say, that if 
he should go much further in his claims of offi- 
cial authority, he would never be found an idle 
boaster. The particle ἐάν is not designed to con- 
cede that he was about to boast in this manner, 
and te γὰρ has the sense of, for even as in Rom. 
i. 26; vii. 7. The object of re is to indicate that 
some other member of a sentence stands in har- 
mony with it or ina reciprocal relation to it. In 
the present case it points out such an agreement 
or correlation between édv—xavyfooua and οὐκς 
αἰσχυνθήσομαι (Passow, Tr. A. B. I. 2 a. bb. B.). 
[On the use of ἔαν with the Aorist subjunctive when 
something objectively possible is thought of in 
the future, but not conceived, of as exactly cer- 
tain, see Winer 3 43, 3b. We may here render 
καυχήσωμαι like the Latin fut. exact. and αἰσχυνθή- 
cova as the fut. simpl. asin our common Eng- 
lish version. The word “ἐξουσία includes both 
the ideas of power and of right or authority.” 
Hover]. Περισσότερον (accus.) should be taken 
in a comparative sense. According to some, the 
comparison has reference to what had been said 
in vv. 4-6; but according to others, it has refe- 
rence to his opponents (more than they boast). It 
is most natural to suppose that he is putting 
himself on an equality with those opponents 
mentioned in ver. 7, and his meaning would then 
be: yet more than 1 just now did when I made 
myself the equal of such as claimed to be Christ’s 
servants. In the words, for edification and not 
for destruction, the church is represented as if 
it were a house or a temple of God (1 Cor. iii. 
16) [and Paul and his associates in the ministry 
are supposed to be artificers in the construction 
of the whole and of each part. It was no part 
of his mission to destroy, but only to save and 
put in order (a true conservatism). Howson 
calls attention to the fact that out of the twenty- 
two times in which the words edify, and edifica- 
tion are used figuratively in the New Testament, 
they are in every instance but one used by Paul; 
and the one exceptional instance (Acts ix. 31) is 
in a book composed probably under his superin- 
tendence, and by a writer of his school. It is 
possible that his predilection for the trope may 
have sprung from his craft as a Cilician tent- 
maker. But Howson is of the opinion that the 
word has always a social character, 7. 6.» that it 
is always applied to the progress of acommunity, 
not of an individual. Hence believers are not 
severally a building, but only parts (living 
stones) of a common structure (Metaphors of St. 
Paul in Sund. Mag. for Jan., 1867, pp. 257-63) ]. 
The expressions here used incidentally also sug- 
gest that his opponents had not edified but had 
rather pulled down (comp. 1 Cor. iii. 17), and 
that they had arrogated to themselves powers 
which Christ had not bestowed upon them. The 
καϑαίρεσις of ver. 4 had been of a different nature 
from that which is here spoken of, for the object 
of that had been to destroy only what obstructed 
the Christian faith, and to animate and assist 


168 


such as were living a life of faith (οἰκοδομὴ in 1 
Cor. viii. 1). The communicative ἡμῶν indicates 
that there were others who shared in this power, 
and who were his genuine associates, and not 
unworthy intruders into this high office. The 
words 7 shall not be ashamed, are very concise 
and emphatic. They refer to what he was doing, 
or to the results of his labors as an Apostle, in 
consequence of which all his boasting on this 
subject would be proved to be the sober truth. 
With this is immediately connected a final sen- 
tence (ver. 9).—That I may not seem as if 
I would terrify you by letters.—This is in- 
troduced by no τοῦ o δὲ λέγω, or anything of the 
kind. The aim which is implied in the iva must 
be that of God who would not allow him to be 
put to shame. It was by an appeal to the re- 
sults of his Apostolic power that he justified 
himself from the charge of using expressions in 
his Epistles which could never be carried into 
execution, and had been, therefore, thrown out 
for mere intimidation. There is no need, there- 
fore, of commencing a new period with iva, 
which, after a parenthesis in ver. 10, comes to a 
conclusion in ver. 11 (that I may not seem to 
terrify you by my Epistles, let such a one think, 
etc.). There would certainly be something 
abrupt in the way in which such a sentence 
would be introduced (and hence some manu- 
scripts insert a dé after iva), and the idea itself 
would be inappropriate (since nothing is, in fact, 
brought forward in ver, 11 to obviate the objec- 
tion which ver. 9 supposes). [‘‘A clause with 
iva, as we have seen before in this Epistle (comp. 
also Gal. ii. 10), often depends on some word or 
words omitted, but easily supplied from the con- 
text. ‘*This is the only instance in the New 
Testament where ἄν, after a conjunction, is used 
with the infinitive. Winer (3 48 6) resolves it 
into ὡς dv ἐκφοβοῖμι ὑμᾶς, as if I might wish to terrify 
you, which agrees with our translation.” Hopar]. 
In later usage ὡς ἄν has the sense of the simple 
ὡς with the ἄν, τ, ¢., of tanguam quasi (as if), and 
it is here employed to modify the force of ἐκφοβεῖν, 


or to indicate that Paul was acting like one who | 


terrifies. The plural seems to imply that Paul 
had already written to the Corinthians more than 
one Epistle. Neanprer: “ We'may reckon up, first, 
an Epistle now lost; secondly, that which we 
now call the first; thirdly, that upon which we 
are now commenting, and, perhaps, finally, the 
one which was sent by the hands of Titus.” 
[Barnes and Stanley think that the Corinthians 
might have seen some of Paul’s Epistles to other 
churches, and been so well acquainted with them 
as to make this general remark respecting them. 
Four large Epistles (two to the Thessalonians, 
one to the Galatians, and one to the Corinthians) 
among those now extant had been written (the 
two first in the city of Corinth) before this time. 
Alford also suggests that Paul may have included 
the letter he was then writing, by way of antici- 
pation ].—For his letters, they say, are in- 
deed weighty, and powerful, but his bo- 
dily presence is weak, and his speech 
contemptible (ver. 10).—He here introduces 
his opponents, urging an objection founded on 
the objection which had been presented in ver. 
9. The speakers who are the subject of φησίν, 
are his opponents, and this verb is equivalent to 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





the impersonal φασίν of later usage (Passow, IL 
2, p. 2258). There is no reason for confining 
this to some single person. Βαρίύς has the sense 
of, gravis, significant, important, impressive, 
inspiring respect, the opposite of ἐξουϑενημένος. 
While his letters were important and forcible 
(mighty), his bodily presence was feeble (not 
weak on account of disease or smallness of size, 
but on account of a personal presence which 
lacked power, the opposite of ἰσχυραί), and his 
oral discourse (instructions of all kinds, exhor- 
tations) commanded no respect, and were re- 
ceived with contempt (comp. 1 Cor. ii. 8 f.). 
There is no intimation that he was destitute of 
those bodily organs which were needful to 8 
good oral expression, or of Grecian refinement 
and culture. Let such an one conclude this, 
that such as we are in word by Epistles 
when absent, such are we also in deed 
when present (ver. 11).—Those who insinu- 
ated such things respecting him, might be as- 
sured that he would exhibit the same character 
in all his apostolical conduct as in his writings, 
and that no one would have reason to reproach 
him for acting the double part ascribed to him 
in ver. 10 (comp. ver. 1). The omission of the 
conjunction (asyndeton), and the position of τοῦτο, 
at the beginning of the sentence, are emphatic. 
Λογίζεσϑαι is here contrasted with the inconsi- 
derate judgment mentioned in ver. 10, and it has 
the sense of, to weigh well. To τοιοῦτοι τῷ ἔργῳ 
we must supply ἐσμέν, not ἐσόμεϑα as if he had 
intended to say that he would actually fulfil his 
threatenings (λόγος). What he meant was, that 
the influence which he exerted personally as an 
Apostle would seem to one who carefully ob- 
served it, and reflected upon it, quite as impor- 
tant and energetic as that which he exhibited in 
his writings. 

[it cannot after all be denied, as Alford con- 
cedes, that some allusion is here made to a defi- 
ciency in the apostle’s personal appearance and 
delivery. It does not seem that his opponents’ 
objection was founded wholly on his reserve in 
the use of his apostolical powers. Without con- 
ceding that he was precisely 6 τρίπηχος dvb pwrog 
καὶ τῶν οὐρανῶν ἅπτομένος, and even if wé receive 
the descriptions given in Pseudo-Lucian, Mala- 
las, Nicephorus and the Apocraphal Acts of Paul 
and Thecla as either caricatures or exaggerated 
traditions of a modern date, we are yet compelled 
to yield something to the almost universal agree- 
ment of antiquity. The general notion which 
the whole ancient church appears to have pre- 
served of our Apostle was, that he was of a short 
stature, and that his body was disfigured by some 
lameness or distortion; that his head was long 
and bald, his complexion transparent, his fore- 
head high, his nose aquiline, his eyes sparkling, 
and his eyebrows close and prominent. And yet 
that there was nothing in his person which 
amounted to a very unsightly deformity, we have 
a right to conclude from Acts xiv. 12, from his 
public influence before his conversion, from the 
power he often exhibited as an orator, and from 
the impression he appears everywhere to have 
produced, It is not improbable, however, from 
such passages as 1 Cor. ii. ὃ, 2 Cor. ii. 18, and 
others in the epistles to the Corinthians and Ga- 
latians, that his temperament was more than 





CHAP. X. 1-18. 


169 





commonly liable to nervous agitations; and it 
would not be strange if his enemies had seen 
something when he was at Corinth, which they 


could pervert to his disadvantage. See Cony- 
beare and Howson, chap. vii. p. 224. Smuiru’s 


Dict. Art. Paul; Ad. Clarke, and Stanley. ] 
Vers. 12-18. To show that his personal influ- 
ence was as energetic as his epistolary dis- 
courses and exhortations, he now appeals to 
what he had actually done as an Apostle. He 
calls attention to the fact that, unlike his arro- 
gant opponents, he had confined himself to those 
limits which were appointed to his calling, and 
within which the church of Corinth properly 
fell, etc.—For we venture not to number 
ourselves among, or compare ourselves 
with, some who commend themselves 
(ver. 12).—The words ov τολμᾶν signify either, 
not to have a heart for something, from a moral re- 
pugnance to such a proceeding (1 Cor. vi. 1); or, 
better, ironically, not to venture; [in this mat- 
ter we are indeed timid], with a severe implica- 
tion that his opponents were vain enough to do 
so. A paronomasia may be noticed in éyxpiva, 
signifying, to place in a line with, and συγκρῖναι, 
to liken, to place by the side, to make equal. The 
words τισὶ τῶν συνιστάντων signify with certain 


persons (comp. ver. 2) of the class that commend | 


themselves, But they, measuring them- 
selves among themselves and comparing 
themselves with themselves are not wise 
[understand it not.} In this sentence αὑτοὶ with 
all its subsequent qualifications, appears to ap- 
ply most appropriately to the Apostle himself 
(comp. Gal. vi. 4). It then appears to be the re- 
gular positive expression, corresponding to the 
subsequent negative in ver. 13, [they measuring 
themselves, efc., but we will not boast ourselves 
of things without measure, | and finds its further 
development in the assertion (ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸ μέτρον 
x. τ. A.) but we will boast according to the mea- 
sure, etc. It was for this reason that we are able 
to account for a reading of the text which arose 
in the earliest times, according to which οὐ 
συνιοῦσιν" ἡ “εἰς δὲ Was left out. It seemed diffi- 
cult to apply what was said in connection with 
αὐτοὶ to Paul’s opponents, and ov συνιοῦσιν would 
make no good sense if αὐτοὶ were applied to Paul 
himself (they commend themselves; but we, 
measuring ourselves by ourselves—i. e., ‘“‘by 
what we really find ourselves to be—and com- 
paring ourselves with ourselves, not with those 
wise men, those pretended knowing ones; or, 
“‘“compiring ourselves with ourselves, who are 
80 unwise, in the opinion of our opponents’’!). 
They also found that on this interpretation the 
words ἡμεῖς δὲ not only seemed superfluous, 
but injurious to the sense of the passage, and that 
on the other hand the sentence read smoothly and 
with an appropriate meaning if οὐ συνιάσιν" ἡμεὶς 
dé were left out (‘‘they commend themselves; 
but we measuring ourselves by ourselves, etc., 
will not boast as to things beyond our mea- 
sure”). It is evident, therefore, that the read- 
ing of the Receptuswhich has those words is the 
most difficult reading, and hence was most likely 
to have been the true one and altered to get rid of 
the difficulty. This also accounts for the fact 
that the abbreviated reading is sustained only 
by Occidental manuscripts, and that even these 
are by no means in agreement, since some of 





them have ἡμεῖς δὲς But even the reading of the 
Receptus which 1s much better sustained is ca- 
pable of a very appropriate sense. Let αὐτοὶ be 
applied to Paul’s opponents. Then the measur- 
ing themselves among themselves, is not the cor- 
rect estimate which people form of themselves 
and their performances in contrast with a more 
uncertain one from a comparison with others, 
but a proud self-conceit springing from a con- 
stant fixing of the thoughts upon themselves and 
their fancied excellences and performances, and 
from never observing those who are superior to 
them, and who have distinguished themselves by 
more exalted achievments; in other words, it is 
an idle self-satisfaction and self-admiration. Nor 
is συνιοῦσιν to be construed as a participle in the 
dative plur. (anacoluthic), but a verb in the 
3d pers. ρίαν. Ind. of συνιέω, like συνιᾶσιν, the 
more common Attic form (adopted by Lachmann 
on the authority of B. and some other MSS.). 
The word stands here in an absolute sense: (they 
not understanding, not reaching a clear discern- 
ment, being deficient in understanding;) like. 
the participle οἱ curvévrec—those who understand, , 
and ὁ συνιῶν Rom. ili. 11, and συνῆκαν Mark vi. 
52. It implies either that the course they take > 
is the reason for their want of intelligence, or~ 
that it is the way in which they exhibit this; 
want. Others explain it: they do not observe- 
or perceive that they are measuring themselves « 
by their own selves; or they do so without being- 
aware of it; but such a sense is agreeable nei-~ 
ther to the order of the words, nor to the gene- 
ral sense of the passage. For the Apostle is: 
speaking not of the way in which they were- 
blinding themselves, but of the folly of their pro-. 
ceeding, in contrast with his own course. With» 
that measuring of themselves by themselves: 
which is sure to lead off into unbounded self-- 
laudation, (inasmuch as no objective limits ean. 
be assigned to a man's exaltation of himself), 
the Apostle contrasts that boasting of one’s self * 
which is confined to the limits assigned him by 
God. ’AAAd is to be taken in the sense of but, 
either like the Germ. sondern, completely revers- - 
ing or giving the negative to the previous clause, . 
or like the Germ. aber, only partially doing so. 
The former is preferable on account of the pre-- 
ceding ov. As he now wishes to carry out the: 
contrast of persons which had*been given already. 
in ἑαυτούς τισι, he brings up in strong light the: 
kind of conduct which is most opposed to the pre- 
tensions of which he had been speaking. But οὐ 
συνιοῦσιν offers an obvious explanation of ov τολμῶ-.- 
uev(Meyer.) [It must be confessed that there is: 
on this interpretation an appearance of defect in, 
that sharp contrast which seems demanded by the - 
ἁλλὰ at the commencement of the passage. That. 
particle seems to require that what he was about: 
to say should be in direct opposition to the self-- 
commendation of those of whom he had just: 
spoken. By referring airoi to the Apostle, this. 
would be clear, since he would oppose his way: 
of proceeding to theirs; but if that word is re-- 
ferred to his opponents, we have the conduct of’ 
the same persons shown in contrast]. Osiander: 
endeavors to avoid this difficulty, by making: 
αὐτοὶ especially emphatic [giving it an exclusive 
power] equivalent to soli [they alone, by them-: 
selves, separate from all other men. KUEHNER. 
Gram. Am. ed. 3 302, 6; Junr. 3 656, 3.¢.]. This 


170 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


μμ. .ϑϑὔ....-........-ςςςς-ςς ὀ:ἠ ᾿Ἠ τ, Γ Γτ᾿τ τ τΤττρτρἴτ;|;ἠ|ΓὴῖΓῸ---ς-,ι..,...ᾺΡ᾽ Ὰ,ἤ:5.0ὔὧὌ ῷὦ..ὍὅΧὉ0 


would make the Apostle say, that he would not 
venture to put himself among or even by the side 
of such persons, but that he would leave them 
to themselves and to their own folly. In this 
case a severe and bitter irony would be expressed: 
“but they, for their own special part, since they 
measure themselves, efc., are not wise; but 
we,” etc. Something of this kind was undoubt- 
edly intended by the Apostle in whatever way 
his language is construed; but it is questionable 
whether it is implied in αὐτοί. [The contrast 
implied in referring αὐτοὶ to Paul’s opponents is 
in the very spirit of this section, and seems de- 
manded by the argument. The very object he 
had in view was to put himself personally in op- 
position to them. The complete meaning de- 
veloped by such a construction may be expressed 
thus: ‘“‘we confess we have not the boldness 
which some have shown; and hence we shrink 
from numbering ourselves, or even comparing 
ourselves with them. On the other hand, we 
think that they are far from showing wisdom 
when they resort to self-commendations, and seek 
for credit by comparing themselves not with true 
Apostles, but with one another, and with their 
ownselyes at different periods. Their self-love 
is sure to flatter them when they look solely at 
their own and others’ accomplishments, instead 
of comparing themselves with the standard which 
God has given us.”’—See a sermon on this text 
by Dr. Chalmers].—Nay, neither will we 
boast without measure—(as far as to things 
which have no limit] (ver. 18). The authorities 
are here in favor of καυχησόμεϑα (Rec.) and are 
sufficiently strong to prove it genuine. The fu- 
ture [absolute, looking to indefinite time and to 
an ethical impossibility, WessTer, chap. vi. p.'84; 
Winer, ἢ 41, 6] implies that such a boasting 
could never by any possibility take place (comp. 
Rom. x. 14). If we leave the word out of the 
itext, we must suppose that the Apostle in ver. 15, 
iby an anacoluthon (καὺχώμενοι) turned back in 
his thoughts to εἰς τὰ ἄμετρα. Fritzsche, who 
prefers the shorter reading of the text in ver. 12, 
and who concludes that ov συνιοῦσιν originated in 
seme marginal gloss, and then created a neces- 
sity for inserting ἡμεῖς δὲ, is in favor of such an 
explanation. But the Receptushasbeen trium- 
phantly defended by Reiche (Commentar. I.) and 
Meyer.—But we boust according to the 
‘measure of the rule which God appor- 
tioned to us.—Opposed to εἰς τὰ ἄμετρα (on to 
‘the unmeasured, εἰς implying the extent or boun- 
‘daries toward which the boasting tended, and 
which formed its measure or limit), stands here 
Kara τὸ μέτρον (according to the measure). This 
latter measure is more particularly defined by 
the additional τοῦ κανόνος, which signifies [pro- 
perly, a reed, rod or staff, to keep anything 
erect, firm or upright, and then] the measure 
‘of the line, or the space determined by the 
measuring line [Robinson’s Greek and Eng. Lez. 
to the N. T.). e prefer the latter signification 
in the sense of a measured space accurately de- 
fined; and hence, in this place, in accordance 
with what follows, the department of influence, 
or of official duty, assigned him by God.*—A 





[* There is no evidenee beyond the vaguest tradition that 
before their separation at Jerusalem the Apostles portioned 
out the different provinces of the world to one another, and 


measure reaching even unto you.—In the 
words οὐ ἐμέρισεν ἡμῖν ὁ ϑεὸς μέτρον w+ have an 
instance of a bold attraction in the s nse of τοῦ 
μέτρον (in apposition with τοῦ κανόνος) ὃ. The 
reason it is joined thus with τοῦ καὶ évo~ probably 
was, because the Apostle wished to give promi- 
nence to the thought that the measure was pre- 
cisely determined, inasmuch as the field of his 
activity had been marked out for him by God, as 
if by a surveyor’s chain, when the Spirit within 
him, as well as external providential circum- 
stances, had shown him in what direction and 
how far he should go (comp. Acts xvi. 6ff.). In 
ἐφικέσϑαι ἄχρι καὶ ὑμῶν (to extend even unto you) 
he meant to say, that in this distribution of parts 
(1 Cor. vii. 17), God had made his measure ex- 
tend even toCorinth. The infinitive is connected 
with ἐμέρισεν, in which is contained the idea of 
an intention. ἴλχρι, etc., 7. e., to Corinth, which 
was then the extreme limit of Paul’s preaching 
in the West. He proceeds, in ver. 14, to show 
that he might, without presumption, regard them 
as within the sphere of his influence, and to con- 
firm what he had said in ver. 138.—For we 
stretch (over-extend) not ourselves beyond 
our measure, as though we reached not 
unto you.—The phrase ὑπερεκτείνειν ἑαυτόν 
properly signifies to stretch one’s self over or 
beyond the measure which had been assigned 
him (by the measuring instrument); andin thus 
using it, the Apostle’s object was to meet the ob- 
jection that he had arrogated to himself in Cor- 
inth something which did not belong to him. 
We must not construe ὡς μὴ ἐφικνούμενοι (the read- 
ings ἐφικόμενοι or ἀφικόμενοι have very feeble au~ 
thority in their favor), as if it were in the pre- 
terite, but take it as a designation of those who 
do not come, i. 6., do not reach to you. The μῇ 
denies the idea supposed, and implies that it 
was only an ideal case which he was supposing, 
viz: that he had not in fact reached to the Cor- 
inthians. He informs them what the real fact 
was, and confirms what he had before asserted, 
when he adds—For even as far as you did 
we come foremost in preaching the gos- 
pel of Christ.—’Egddcayvev suggests that the 
priority of influence in Corinth properly helonged 
to him, and that he had been before his opponents 
in preaching the Gospel and in establishing a 
Church there. Even if it were proved that 
φϑάνειν in Rom. ix. 81; Phil. iii. 16; Dan. iv. 8, 
should have the meaning simply of to come to 
a place generally, we think its more fundamen- 
tal meaning [in the aorist: we have already 
come, or have come beforehand] should be re- 





yet there was doubtless an understanding, perhaps silently 
acquiesced in by them all, that only one Apostle, or supreme 
authority, was needful on any one field. In some speciak 
sense, “the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed to 
Paul and that of the circumcision to Peter” (Gal. ii.7); and 
in consequence of this, James, Cephas and John went unto 
the circumcision, and Paul and Barnabas unto the Gentiles 
(Gal. ii, 9). Paul appears also to have adopted the rule that 
he would leave the minor details of labor to inferior hands, 
when the Gospel had once been planted in a place, while he 
pressed forward to new countries. Hence he proposed to 
visit even Rome, where a Church had been formed by others, 
only by the way (Rom. xv. 20,24). If, then, any persons 
came to Corinth in the character of Apostles, or professing 
to act under the authority of other Apostles, while Paul was 
still alive and uctive on that field, and especially if they re- 
sisted his authority, it was a decided infringement of this 
express or implied arrangement, or a plan denial of his 
right to the name of an Apo: tle. Comp. Stanley]. 


CHAP. X. 1-18. 


Vig 








tained inthis passage. “Ev τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ implies 
that the announcement of salvation was the ele- 
ment in which he moved in all his apostolic jour- 
neys; or it simply means, while we were preaching 
Christ—_Not boasting without measure 
in other men’s labors (ver. 15a)—These words 
must be joined to ver. 13, so as to make ver. 14 
not merely the second half of ver. 14, but a pa- 
renthesis. He resumes the subject contained in 
οὐκ εἰς τὰ ἄμετρα καυχᾶσϑαι, and grammatically 
connects what he here says with καυχησόμεϑα, 
which had to be understood in ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸ 
μέτρον, ete ,in ver. 13. The participial sentence 
must therefore be joined with καυχησόμεϑα and not 
with ἐφϑάσαμεν (Riickert)—But having a 
hope that as your faith increases we 
shall be enlarged among you according 
to our rule abundantly (ver. 154).—We 
have here a further development of the Apos- 
tle’s discourse. In the first place an object is 
given to the καυχᾶσϑαι, which he had disclaimed 
for himself when he says: ἐν ἀλλοτρίοις κόποις. 
This contains an indirect allusion to his oppo- 
nents, who in fact boasted of other men’s la- 
bors, and arrogated as their own what had been 
done by others (κόπος, Jno. iv. 88; 1 Cor. iii. 8). 
With this negative he goes on to connect the 
prospect of an extension of his sphere of labor 
beyond Corinth, in consequence of an anticipated 
increase of their faith; αὐξανομένης τῆς πίστεως 
ὑμῶν. [Ἐλπίδα ἔχοντες is a more forcible ex- 
pression than the simple participle ἐλπίζοντες 
would have been, and it signifies a firm, habitual 
confidence. The present αὐξανομένης indicates not 
only that their faith would be increased (Engl. 
A. V.), but that it was then actually increasing. 
He had an assurance that their faith would have 
a steady, pure and vigorous progress, and hence 
that he would not much longer be contracted 
and held back by his care for them. On this 
assurance he entertained a confident hope in a 
short time, ἐν ὑμῖν μεγαλυνϑῆναι, ete. “Ev ὑμῖν 
does not belong especially to that which had just 
been said, as if the Apostle had intended to say 
that he hoped their faith would be increased 
either in their hearts (in distinction from their 
outward growth among the people) or in the 
common fellowship of believers; for in either 
case ὑμῶν would be superfluous. He hoped that 
when their faith had been increased, he would 
be magnified among them, and would be assisted 
by their growing congregations to accomplish 
further and more important results. There is 
evidently nothing in the language used to imply 
that the Apostle was thinking of the geographi- 
cal position of Corinth or of the favorable op- 
portunities which would be presented there for 
more extensive enterprises (év is in the sense of 
per). [And yet, as Grotius and Rosenmueller 
suggest, such an idea would have been peculiarly 
appropriate to the Corinthians, who were great 
navigators, and had peculiar facilities for assist- 
ing him on his journey to countries farther West 
and South. Not unreasonably, Osiander con- 
cludes from this passage that no Apostle had be- 
fore this been further West]. Even the meta- 
phor of a man of extraordinary stature, who 
could therefore reach further without going be- 
yond his measure (Meyer), is probably foreign 
to the passage. Still less appropriate is the ex- 
planation of eyadivev, which makes it signify: 


celebrari (to be praised, although in other places 
the word may have that meaning), or rather: to 
be glorified among you. The context, however, 
favors the idea that the Apostle was thinking of 
an enlargement or exaltation of his power to 
perform his duties, in consequence of which he 
would be able to press further on, and enlarge 
the sphere of his labors. That this increase of 
his greatness would only be in conformity with 
his calling as an Apostle, he indicates by the 
words, according to our rule (κατὰ τὸν κανόνα ἡμῶν). 
This rule has no reference to the general princi- 
ple expressed in Rom. xv. 20, for the connection 
(ver. 13) required him simply to say that he was 
confining himself to the limits God had assigned 
him (according to our measuring line, 7. e., never 
to go beyond the space God has distinctly marked 
off for me). He is careful, however, to inform 
his readers that these limits did not abridge his 
free action and did not make his very great en- 
largement impossible. This he lets us know in 
εἰς περισσείαν. He was well aware that he had 
been ordained to an Apostleship which was uni- 
versal in its object (comp. Rom. i. 13ff.; xv. 23f4 
28), and which called for an extraordinary 
energy. Riickert’s idea, that avéav.—eic περισ- 
ociav has a tincture of irony about it, appears to 
be without foundation (comp. Meyer).—To 
preach the Gospel as far as the parts be- 
yond you (ver.16a). He here informs us more 
definitely what would be the result of the en- 
largement of which he had just spoken, and 
what he would become eapable of. Ἐῤαγγελίσασϑαι 
is here the infinitive either of the design or of 
the result to be accomplished by the enlarge- 
ment; it is not simply epexegetical of what that 
enlargement was to be (gq. d., that is, to make 
known the Gospel), but to tell us what would fol- 
low that enlargement, or why he hoped for it 
(in order that). As in 1 Pet. i. 25; 1. Thess. ii. 
9; John viii. 26, εἰς is here used to imply the 
making known to, and bringing the Gospel into, 
those countries. ὝὙπερέκεινα is a word used in a 
corrupted Greek style for ἐπέκεινα. In the next 
clause he proceeds to give us the negative de- 
scription of the same result or design—not to 
boast ourselves of things prepared for 
our hands in another’s line (ver.164.). In 
this additional qualification of what he had said, 
he intended to signify that in such an extension 
of his Apostolical influence he did not mean to 
boast like his opponents of something already 
prepared for him in the sphere of other men’s 
labors, ὃ. e., to appropriate to himself the fruits 
of other persons’ labors, and thus to acquire ὦ 
falsé reputation for greatness. [In our common 
English version a comma should be placed after 
the word ‘‘line,”’ so that no one should read the 
passage as if it were, ‘‘another man’s line of 
things” ]. The words ὁ κανών have here the 
sense of, what is marked off by a measuring line; 
properly, the extent of space intended for ano- 
ther and assigned to him by the measuring line. 
The meaning of the word is not changed here, 
though the general idea it conveys is affected by 
the context. In contrast with this false and 
censurable self-glorification, he now presents in 
a general sentence the glorying which is proper 
and commendable. The general rule with re- 
spect to this he announces thus—But he that 
glorieth let him glory in the Lord (ver. 17). 


112 





Comp. 1 Cor. i. 31. The reason for this glorying 
which is mentioned in ver. 18 makes it evident 
that κύριος (God) is here represented to be not 
so much the object of the glorying as the reason 
on account of which one glories. To a selfish 
and arbitrary self-commendation, to a false 
boasting, stands opposed a glorying in a fellow- 
ship with the Lord, as the true source of all abi- 
lity, or on account of that approbation which 
God bestows upon us and which is revealed in 
the blessing attending our labors. Such a glory- 
ing is shown in the confession that whatever 
success we have comes from God (comp. chap. 
iii. 3).—For not he that commendeth him- 
self is approved, but whom the Lorxd 
commendeth (ver. 18). With respect to this 
commendation of ourselves, comp. ver. 12, The 
person who presumes to commend himself thus 
is brought before us with a special emphasis in 
ἐκεῖνος. Δόκιμος, in this connection, where the 
Apostle is speaking of Christ’s ministers, signi- 
fies one who is approved or authenticated as a 
faithful minister of the Lord (2 Tim. ii. 15). 
Meyer draws from the whole passage a some- 
what different sense; for in his view καυχᾶσϑαι 
ἐν κυρίῳ is a glorying in God as the Being 
through whose grace and power he has and does 
every thing (comp, xii, 9ff.; 1 Cor. xv. 10). The 
opposite of this is the commendation of our own 
selves: ‘‘for not he who acts: differently from 
this, and instead of glorying in the Lord, com- 
mends himself, is approved (tried experimentally 
by Christian tests), but he whom the Lord com- 
mends (by His blessing, and not by any literal 
or direct praise). Nranpper: ‘Only that which 
the Lord accomplished by the instrumentality of 
aman is really his commendation, not his own 
commendations of himself, or dead letters of 
commendation like those which the Judaizing 
teachers carried.” [Comp. chap. iii. 1, and 
above ver. 12]. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


[1. The Christian and especially the Christian 
pastor, should be a man of combined strength 
and gentleness. The one quality without the 
other produces a distorted character. Without. 
strength there can be no real gentleness, to the 
very idea of which the conception of a reserved 
force is necessary, an energy which on occasion 
forbears to exert its appropriate qualities. The 
Apostle had been gentle and meek in the former 
part of this Epistle, but it was not from feebleness 
of character. He could be, like his Lord, a lion 
or a lamb, as circumstances called for such qua- 
lities. The Church needs heroes as well as mar- 
tyrs; to contend sometimes for truth and rights, 
as well as sometimes to surrender themselves to 
the smiter. There may be more danger that 
God’s people should fail in benignity or meek- 
ness, but there have been seasons where they 
have shown an equally painful lack of a magna- 
nimity which sympathizes with great enterprises 
and with oppressed humanity, and a fervent zeal 
which cannot bear them that are evil (Rev. ii. 2; 
Judg. v. 23)]. 

2. The minister of Christ is a spiritual war- 
rior, in arms against every thing which is in the 
way of the progress of Christ’s kingdom, of the 
truth and of the knowledge of God; or which 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





tends to impede or impair their exclusive and 
complete authority. He is often compelled to 
experience that his natural powers are weak and 
sinful, but his sinful infirmities and afflictions 
are never allowed to control his method of war- 
fare. . The Spirit of that God, in whose cause he 
maintains the conflict, supplies him with wea- 
pons of Almighty power, which pierce every 
covering, overcome all opposition, and overthrow 
the strongest holds. This sword of the Spirit, 
the enlightening and quickening word, cuts 
through the most ingeniously contrived knots 
which the mind of man, however aided by Satanic 
art has been able to form, and batters down and 
destroys the most powerful defences which the 
reason of man has been able to construct against 
God. This is the light which penetrates the 
darkness of the human understanding, awakens 
in men ἃ Consciousness of their weakness and 
their errors in Divine things, convinces them of 
the infallible and exclusive certainty of the re- 
velation God has made of Himself in Christ and 
so completely subjects their mental powers to 
Christ that that revelation becomes their only 
authority in matters of faith. In epposition to 
an enemy whose equipment is ‘‘great power and 
much craft,’ the spiritual combatant or com- 
mander has not only a Divine energy but a wis- 
dom which is superior to all human craftiness. 
But before punishing the refractory, he distin- 
guishes accurately between the seducers and the 
seduced, and he is careful kindly and thoroughly 
to win the latter and to draw them away from 
their dangerous associates. In such a work his 
love will be quite as prominent as his wisdom, 
for he will remember that. his official power was 
intrusted to him by God not to destroy but 
to save and benefit his fellowmen. 

2. The true minister of Christ can easily be 

istinguished from all arrogant intruders into 
the sacred office, in the first place, by his abstain- 
ing from all self-laudation, and by his leaving it 
entirely to God to justify him and to authenticate 
him as a servant of the Lord; so that if he ever 
boasts it will be a glorying in the Lord by whose 
grace he is qualified for his work, and without 


which he is and can do nothing: and in the se-- 


cond place, by his confining himself strictly to the 
sphere to which his Lord has called him, in 
which he makes all he does subservient to the Di- 
vine glory, and beyond which he never attempts 
to pass into new fields until he has performed 
all that had been previously required of him and 
is led and strengthened by the Divine hand. 


[8. The conflict of truth with error, of sin and — 


holiness, can never cease until all sin and error 
are exterminated from the earth. While true 
benevolence will allow of no such intolerance as 
resorts to carnal weapons against the life, repu- 
tation or outward prosperity of ungodly men, it 
can never be wanting in inclination, wisdom or 
power to pursue its conquests while any degree 
of sin or error remains in the world. This con- 
flict is therefore truly “irrepressible” until the 
kingdom of darkness shall be utterly destroyed]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarkr:— Ver. 1. Christ’s faithful ministers 
will endeavor to deal with souls as Jesus Himself 
dealt with them (Matth. xii. 17-20).—It is right 


CHAP. X. 1-18. 





to meet all evil reports, but let it be always with 
becoming modesty.—Ver. 2. Hepincer: Gentle- 
ness may and ought sometimes to be followed by 
sharpness and severity. In a world which is 
filled with wrong and outrage, who would be 
perpetually administering consolation (1 Tim. v. 
20)?—Ver. ὃ. God’s people and servants are spi- 
ritual soldiers who must war a good warfare (1 
Tim. i. 18), and for this God alone can provide 
adequate weapons.—Ver. 4. Inrp: A fortress is 
what makes resistance and is not easily taken. 
In the unsanctified heart it is: wilfulness, a 
proud spirit, inveterate wickedness, habitual sins, 
the old Adam with all his defences, subterfuges 
and pretended rights; or it is: everything which 
Satan and the world sets up in opposition to the 
kingdom of Christ, such as power, great names, 
eraft, fraud, calumny, wealth, great numbers, 
philosophy and eloquence.—Curysostom: Car- 
nal weapons are wealth, fame, worldly power, 
fluency of speech, severity, circumventive arts, 
flatteries and hypocrisies.—Ver. 5. Isip: That 
which is lofty is also proud, established. Here 
it stands for all opposition to the word of God, 
to Christ, to repentance and to faith; inasmuch 
as men are ashamed of the humble requirements 
and the cross of Christ, ridicule the duties of 
self-denial, and resist the progress of Christ’s 
kingdom with all their subtility and power.— 
Reason is one of the noblest of God’s gifts, but 
when it is abused, when it sets itself against 
God’s word, and claims to be the supreme judge 
and arbiter in matters of faith, e/c., it must be re- 
jected.—Ver. 6. The revenge which springs from 
a carnal and embittered spirit should always be 
repressed, but that which comes from a spiritual 
desire to rebuke and faithfully punish wickedness 
is commendable and desirable.—A faithful minis- 
ter should endeavor to unite, edify and strengthen 
his people before he attempts to scatter and 
punish those who are opposed to him.—Ver. 7. 
Teachers and preachers should not be directed 
by the mere outward semblance of things, but 
act honestly, faithfully and suitably to their 
calling.—Ver. 8. A good Christian will aiways 
be grateful to those who faithfully tell him the 
truth and never flatter him.—Spiritual power 
should be exercised with no other desire than 
to edify and benefit God’s people (chap. xii. 
19).—Ver. 9. An upright servant of God will be 
especially careful to avoid every appearance of 
that which has been laid to his charge (1 Pet. ii. 
12).—Ver. 11. We should strive never to make 
an improper use of the gentle dealings of pious 
people, lest we compel them to exchange gentle- 
ness for seyerity.—It is a great thing for a 
preacher never to contradict his words by his 
works, and to be always the same, present or 
absent, efe.—Ver. 12. No man can judge himself 
correctly, if he looks only at himself. He must 
compare himself with those who possess more 
excellent gifts, that he may learn to think mode- 
rately of himself.—Ver. 13. God has measured 
out to every faithful preacher, the precise limits 
of his official duty, and he should strive to occu- 
py these with all fidelity, and to leave nothing 
uadone within his measure!—Ver. 14. A grandi- 
loquent style of speaking however common and 
favored by worldly people, is peculiarly offen- 
sive to the servants and the children of God.— 











173 


Ver. 15. Blessed is that congregation which, for 
a long time, has a faithful pastor, and has grown 
and strengthened under his ministrations.—But 
the minister who has been successful in saving 
and building up the people of his charge, may 
be convinced on right principles, that God has 
called him to go further, and enlarge his field.— 
The great business of Christianity is to have 
faith. This is the true bond by which our souls 
are spiritually united with God, and through 
which we become and continue branches of 
Christ, derive spiritual nourishment from Him, 
and so are able to advance in goodness.—Ver. 
17. Everything without Christ is nothing; and 
nothing with Christ is everything.—Ver. 18. 
Sprener: To praise one’s self is to derogate just 
so much from God’s glory, and is an insolence 
which God will assuredly resist. Great indeed 
is the commendation which God bestows; by 
showing to an assembled universe, that He is 
pleased with our works, by the testimony of a 
good conscience in our own hearts, and by the 
successful result of what we have done. 

Bervens. Brete:—Ver. 8. Christians live in 
the flesh among their fellowmen, not to obey, 
but to overcome their fleshly inclinations. —Ver. 
4. Before anything can be built up in the king- 
dom of God, whatever is opposed to it, as pride 
and false prejudices must be discovered and re- 
moved.—Ver. 5. Carnal wisdom, vain thoughts, 
and the conclusions of unassisted reason, are the 
principal obstacles with which the gospel has to 
contend. They can never be subdued by exter- 
nal force, nor by counter opinions of men, but 
by the sword of the Spirit. Our great work is 
to learn to wield this sword with faithfulness and 
skill.—The right knowledge of God will always 
lead to a subjugation of ourselves to Him, for it 
will show what are our true relations to Him. 
Whoever follows not the Lord Jesus as a little 
child, but proudly adheres to the conceited max- 
ims of human wisdom, will certainly fall into 
darkness. It must be our constant care to hum- 
ble every high thing and bring it into subjection 
to the simplicity of Christ. It will be easy to do 
this if we allow the Holy Spirit. to work freely in 
our hearts.—Ver. 7. Whoever sees ouly what the 
outward eye naturally rests upon, will never ob- 
serve the Spirit, and the footsteps of Christ.— 
Ver. 8. If the appointed overseers in the Church 
would use their power in the wisest manner, they 
should insist upon nothing but what will promote 
the growth of real piety, and they should ex- 
clude from visible fellowship none whom Christ 
has thought worthy of an invisible fellowship 
with Himself and His people.—If each one would 
give his attention to the measure which God hath 
measured to him, and be faithful in that without 
disturbing others in their proper spheres, the 
peace and unity of the Christian world would 
never be broken.—Ver. 15. Our first business is 
to learn what is the peculiar work to which God 
calls us.—Ver. 17. As long as you imagine you 
have something to boast of, you know neither 
God nor yourself, and you are making a god of 
yourself.—Ver. 18. We have here a little text of 
great importance. Great and small, strong and 
feeble, come within its range, that the one may 
not be discouraged, and that the other may not 
be presumptuous. 


174 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


ee 


Riecer:—Vers. 1, 2. Nothing is more diffi- 
cult than for a man to speak much of himself. 
If, however, circumstances demand it, let him 
show that a good conscience is not necessarily a 
feeble or timid one.—Our Lord always endeavored 
to make the way of repentance and amend- 
ment as easy as possible, and He never threw 
needless impediments in the path of those who 
were seeking for truth.—Ver. 5. We should 
never hesitate to break in pieces all carnal wea- 
pons, but we should strive to bring those who 
once used them, to accept of the easy yoke of 
Christ, and to learn of Him that they may find 
that rest which their souls never knew while 
contending against God.—Ver. 7ff. We are very 
liable falsely to suspect others, when our judg- 
ments are guided by wrong principles, and are 
formed according to appearances. How cruel 
have been the imputations under which the most 
excellent of the earth have sometimes been 
obliged to live! Wicked men have not been 
afraid to trample under foot those whom God has 
prepared to sit with His Son on the throne of 
His glory. Teach us, Ὁ God, so to use Thy 
grace, that we may meekly submit to ignominy, 
and yet hope for glory!—Ver. 12ff. Where God 
helps, there only can the believer find a path to 
walk.—Ver. 17f. Something we must have to 
support us while all around us are judging and 
despising us. But if thou wilt glory, glory only 
in the Lord who has accepted of thee, and counted 
thee worthy of His high calling, with whose 
pounds thou art trading, and for whom thou art 
to live and die.—Even in the judgment of com- 
mon sense it is a contemptible thing for a man 
to praise himself. But there are many arts by 
which it is consistent with good manners and in- 
telligence to draw upon ourselves the observa- 
tion of those around us.—The Lord can praise 
us, sometimes by opening doors which no art or 
power of man could previously open, and some- 
times by quieting those who before had thought 
unfavorably of us (Rey. iii. 9). But in general 
our cause must be reserved for that great day 
when the Lord will judge every secret thing. 

Hevsner:—Ver. 1. The good qualities of 
those who act as spiritual shepherds are sure to 
be misrepresented. Their gentleness will be 
called weakness, and their earnestness, arro- 
gance and rashness. Even those who commonly 
appear retiring and diffident, when necessity 
calls for it, sometimes put forth gredt energy.— 
Ver. 3. The Christian must always be at war 
with the world, but his weapons must be spiri- 
tual and very different from those of worldly 
prudence.—Ver. 4. Only the pure in heart have 
courage to attack sins which are rooted deeply 
in the spirit of the world, and sustained by pub- 
lic laws and usages (wicked maxims, established 
cusioms and erroneous opinions).—Ver. 5. Man’s 
pride rebels against the Gospel, but those who 
are enlightened and strengthened by the Spirit 
of God can get the victory over it.—That reason 
which exults itself against Christianity and will 
learn nothing from Christ, is false (Luther: Sa- 
tan’s harlot).—Ver. 6. All who are in favor of 
right and order in the Church must ordinarily 
rally around their ministers.—Ver. 7. There are 
other and perhaps better Christians than your- 
self (against exclusiveness).—Ver. 8. There is a 





salutary power which belongs to the pastoral of- 
fice, which is not for condemnation, but for edi-. 
fication, and which ought always to be cheer. 
fully acknowledged by the people. Ministers 
should never attempt to drive their people by 
slavish fears.—Ver. 10. Extraordinary talents 
or merits are not always connected with an im- 
posing presence or a remarkable eloquence.— 
Ver. 11. The truest respect of our fellowmen is 
acquired by showing them that we have been 
called of God and are led by His Spirit; not by 
exhibitions and a consciousness of our own pow- 
ers, which too often engender pride.—Ver. 12. 
Great as thou mayest be, there are probably 
some much greater! Nothing can be more idle 
than for a man to make himself his standard and 
then measure himself by it.—Ver. 13. God gives 
to every man the sphere of action in which his 
talents may be best employed; this he should 
strive to occupy, and never break into that of 
his neighbor and arrogate to himself something 
which is not his.—Ver. 15, Those who occupy 
well a small sphere will be very sure to be Di- 
vinely called to a larger (Luke xix. 17).—Ver.17. 
No garment is so beautiful and no honor so illus- 
trious as humility.—Ver. 18. What if you are 
commended by yourself and by all men? One 
word from your final Judge may turn it all to 
shame. How different will be His estimate of all 
human merit! 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 8. The Spirit of Christ 
enables us net only to mortify the deeds of the 
body (Rom. viii. 18), but to subject the flesh in 
which we live and walk (Gal. ii. 20) so com- 
pletely under the seal of the Spirit, that our 
tongue, eyes, ears and all our members, our rea- 


son, and all our minds and hearts, shall be con-. 


secrated to the service of God (Rom. vi. 18). 
But whoever serves God in this life must be a 
warrior. If this is true of all Christians (Eph. 
vi. 10), it is in a double sense true of ministers. 
But he wars a good warfare if, while walking in 
the flesh, he wars not after the flesh, with pas- 
sion, vindictiveness, pusillanimity, unworthy ar- 
tifices and vain ambition.—Ver. 4. In the eye of 
the world, carnal weapons are mighty, and the 
spiritual weapons of the Church (the word of 
God, preaching, faith, confessions, patience and 
spiritual gifts) are of no consequence; but in 
God’s sight, carnal weapons are powerless and 
vain, and those which come from the holy ar- 
mory, where David obtained his equipments 
(Ps. xviii. 85, 86), are mighty. What bulwarks 
has the god of this world erected to keep men 
in their wicked ways! The idolatrous systems of 
heathen nations, the self-righteous prejudices 
of the Jew, the philosophic arrogance of the 
Greek, the civil grandeur of the Roman, the 
haughty power of the world, the whole manner 
of life sanctioned by ancestral usages and deeply 
rooted popular prejudices, strongly fortified er- 
rors of heretics,—these are the strongholds 
which the Church has had to storm, with no 
other weapons than the trumpet of the Gospel 
and the sword of the Spirit.—Ver. 5. As a be- 
leaguered enemy builds up one wall behind ano- 
ther, and erects many towers in his defence, so 
rises up from the carnal institutions assailed by the 
Gospel, one high thing after another to maintain 
their life, their purposes, their honor, and their 


RSS eh ν δν 


CHAP. XI. 1-338. 175 





loves and pleasures against the word of God, 
which demands an unconditional surrender. 
What was it that subdued me and made me re- 
nounce myself, die to myself, and thus become 
my own enemy; made me depend entirely upon 
Jesus, lose myself in Him, and find my all in 
Him? Nothing but the word of God, whose 
power is so wonderful. This it was which de- 
stroyed every high thing which my imagination 
erected, and behind which I had intrenched my- 
self. As long as reason, with its power of 
thought and will, remained in the’service of the 
flesh (Eph. ii. 3), she was God’s enemy and 
“Satan’s harlot” (Luther); but no sooner was 
she taken captive to the obedience of Christ, than 
she became a submissive handmaid, performing 
precisely the opposite service for, not against, 
the knowledge of God. For faith is in its essen- 
tial nature obedience to Christ (Rom. i. 5; xvi. 
26).—Ver. 8. This text appeals to all ministers: 
For edification and not for destruction! This 
admonishes us that we should make such a use 
of the power which the Lord has committed to 
“us that we may be commended as faithful stew- 
ards. 

[The Christian Church is engaged in a conflict, 


XIV.—HIS OWN BOASTING IN CONTRAST WITH THAT OF HIS OPPONENTS. 
SONABLE DEMANDS UPON THEIR FORBEARANCE. 
PREEMINENCE OF THE APOSTLE. 


HIS OPPONENTS. 





and every Christian is a warrior. I. For what? 
1. For the knowledge of God; and 2. for the obe- 
dience of Christ (ver. 5). This conflict cannever 
cease while a hurtful error, or a disobedient 
person, remains on earth. Strongholds must be 
demolished (ver. 4); rational powers taken cap’ 
tive (ver. 5); and incorrigible ones cast out (ver. 
6). IL. Some principles according to which it 
must be conducted. 1. Christ must be over all, 
all must be His, and exclusive Christ-parties 
among such as belong to Him are schismatic 
(ver.7); 2. Christ’s Spirit must animate all; (a) 
his meekness and gentleness (ver. 1), or (ὁ) his 
severity (ver. 2) according to the occasion; 3. 
Spiritual weapons alone must be used: every 
man’s freedom and external position must be re- 
spected, but whatever truth and love can do 
must be done (ver. 4); 4. Nothing but the good 
of individual men and of society must be sought 
(ver. 8,9); 5. Men must be valued not by their 
own or other’s estimate of them, but by the 
standard of Divine truth (vv. 12,17, 18); 6. Each 
one must be confined to the sphere to which Pro- 
vidence assigns him, and yet this should be con- 
tinually enlarging (vv. 15), 16]. 


REA- 
SEVERE DESCRIPTION OF 


CHAPTER XI. 1-38. 


Wovutp to God [Would that] ye could bear! with me a little in my folly [a little 


2 folly in me]:? and indeed [ye do] bear with me. 


For [me; for] I am jealous over 


you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present 


3 you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 


But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent be- 


guiled Eve through his subtilty, so* your minds should be corrupted from the simpli- 


4 city‘ that is in Christ. 


For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we 


have not preached [a Jesus whom we preached not], or ¢f ye receive another spirit, 
which ye have not received [received not, λαμβάνετε], or another gospel, which ye 


ὑπερλίαν apostles. 


[among all with respect to you. 


oo Th or 


have not accepted [accepted not, ἐλάβετε], ye might well bear with Aim ὃ 
pose I was not a whit [in any respect] behind the very chiefest [these super-eminent, 
But though J be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have 
been thoroughly [in every respect] made manifest’ among you in all things. 
Or have, 7] I committed an offence in abasing myself 
that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely? I 
robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service. 


For® I sup- 


Have 


And when I was 


present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lack- 
ing to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have 
10 kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself. As the 
truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasing [this boasting shall not 
11 be closed against me, ἡ χαύχησις αὕτη οὐ φραγήσεται] in the regions of Achaia. Where- 
12 fore? because I love you not? God knoweth. But what I do, that will I [also] do, 
that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, 


. 


116 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 








—= 





13 they may be found even as we. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, trans- 
14 forming themselves into the [om. the] apostles of Christ. And no marvel ;* for Satan 
himself is transformed [transforms himself, μετασχηματίξεται] into an angel of light. 
15 Therefore ἐξ is no great thing if his ministers alsu be transformed [and become] as the 
16 ministers of righteotsness; whose end shall be according to their works. I say again, 
Let no man think me a fool [foolish, ἄφρονα]; if otherwise [but if it cannot be so, εἰ 
17 δὲ μή ye], yet as a fool receive me, that 1 [too, χἀγὼ} may boast myself a little.® That 
which I speak, I speak ἐξ not after [the manner of, χατὰ] the Lord, but as it were 
18 foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I 
19 will glory also. For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise. 
20 For ye suffer [it patiently], if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if 
aman take of you [insnares you, λαμβάνει], if a man exalt himself, if a man smite 
21 you on the face. I speak as concerning reproach [By way of disparagement, I speak] 
as though we had been [were] weak.” Howbeit [but], whereinsoever any is bold, (1 
22 speak foolishly,) [am bold also. Are they Hebrews? so am I. — Are they Israelites? 
23 soamI. Are they the seed of Abraham? soamI. Are they ministers of Christ? 
(I speak as a fool [as though beside myself, zapagpovdy],) I am more; in [by, ἐν] la- 
bours more abundant, in [by] stripes above measure, in [by] prisons more frequent," 
24 in [by] deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. 
25 Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night 
26 anda day have I been in the deep; Jn [by] journeyings often, ix [by] perils of 
waters [rivers], in [by] perils of robbers, in [by] perils by [from] mine own country- 
men, in [by] perils by [from] the heathen, zn [by] perils in the city, ix [by] perils in 
27 the wilderness, in [by] perils in the sea, in [by] perils among false brethren; In [by] 
weariness” and painfulness; in [by] watchings often, in [by] hunger and thirst, in [by] 
28 fastings often, in [by] cold and nakedness. Beside those things that are without [ Be- 
side other things which take plave, χωρὶς τῶν παρεχτὸς, that which cometh upon me™ 
29 daily [day by day], the care of all the churches. Who is weak, and Iam not weak? 
30 who is offended, and I burn not? If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which 
31 concern mine infirmities. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which [God, 
the Father of the Lord Jesus, who] is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not. 
22 In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king, kept [guarded, ἐφρούρει] the city 
of the Damascenes with a garrison [om. with a garrison, desirous'] to apprehend me: 
33 And through a window [a small opening, διὰ ϑυρίδος in a basket was I let down by 
[through, διὰ] the wall, and escaped his hands. 


1 Ver. 1.—The best attested reading is re ἀφροσύνης. Several MSS. have τι τῆς ἀφροςύνης [and this was the reading 
which our A. V. adopted], to which some [Ital. Vulg.. and Lat. Fathers] add μου. The var. τῇ ἀφροσύνῃ [which Stephens 
adopted from some less important MSS., and Chrys. Theodt.], and ἀφροσύνην are probably corrections with the view of re- 
storing the regular construction. 

2 Ver. 1.—The Rec. ἠνείχεσθε is but feebly sustained [only a few cursives of no great authority, one MS. of Theophyl.]. 
The var. ἀνεχέσθε [which is a little better sustained, 7. e., by B. (Birch) K., a number of cursives, Theodt., and one MS. of 
Chrys.} originated in the same word near the close of the verse. [Cod. Sin. gives ἀνασχέσθε instead of avex, as a van lene 

3 Ver. 3.—Ovtws before φθαρῇ is probably not genuine; it is wanting in the best authorities. [B. Ὁ. (1st hand), F. ας 
Sin. Copt. Arm. and some Greek Fathers, Tisch. Bloomf. and Words. with the Rec. retain it, but Griesb. Lachm, Alf. 
Stanley and Meyer omit it]. 

4 Ver. 8.---καὶ τῆς ἁγνότητος is a gloss which is to be accounted for by ἁγνήν in ver. 2; it was placed either before or 
after τῆς ἁπλότ. [It is inserted by B. F. G. Sin. (δὰ hand brackets it) and several versions. Alford suggests that it would 
naturally arise from its ending being so similar to that of ἁπλότ., while Tisch. and Bloomf. reject it as a gloss to explain 
ἁπλότ. Epiphan, p. 275 adds: καὶ ἁγνείας Χριστοῦ καὶ δικαιοσύνης, which, perhaps, confirms the conjecture of a gloss]. 


6 Ver. 4.—Lachm. has ἀνέχεσθε, but on inferior authority. It appears to bea correction [on account of the apparent _ 


necessity of the present tense in the apodosis to correspond with the pres. of the potasis; but comp. ver. 1. and 
Exeg. obss.]. —* 

®° Ver. 5.—Lachm. has δέ instead of yap, but on the sole authority of a reading in B., which appears to have originated 
in an attempt to lighten the severity of the expression. 

7 Ver. 6.—Lachm. and Tisch. have φανερώσαντες ; it probably originated in the attempt to explain φανερωθέντες by 
φανερώσαντες ἑαυτούς, Which words some copies actually have, [and they were regarded as especially appropriate to τὴν 
γνῶσιν, of which, however, the reading involves a very harsh ellipse]. The var. φανερωθείς, found in some copies, is also 
in favor of the Receptus. [Lachmann’s reading, however, is sustained by B. F.@. and the later Sin., though the 3d hand has 
φανερωθέντες. Alford thinks it much more likely that the harsh φανερώσαντες should have been changed into the easy 
φανερωθέντες, than that the contrary should have occurred, especially as the latter word could so naturally be suggested 
by chap. y. 11. It probably became dav. eavrous and then φανερωθέντες. 

8 Ver. 14.— Rec. has θαυμαστόν, but it has less authority than θαῦμα, and it is probably a gloss. 

9 Ver. 16.—Rec. bas μικρόν τι κἀγὼ; but κἀγὼ μικρόν τι is much better susteined. - 

10 Ver. 21.—Lachm. has ἠσθενήκαμεν, but it has the authority of only B. and 80. [also more recently of Sinait. and 8 
Vat. ΜΒ, of a recent date}. 

11 Ver. 23.—Lachm. has ἐν dua. περ. before ἐν mAny. ὑπερβ. on the authority of B. Ὁ. (1st hand) Ἐς, the Vulg. Goth, and 
Ethiop. Versions,.and many Latin Fathers. Sinait. has ἐν mAny. περισσοτέρως, ἐν φυλακαῖς ὑπερβαλλόντως ; the 3d hand, 
however, agrees with the Receptus]. 
ie hs 27.—Rec. has ἐν before κόπῳ, but in opposition to the [best authorities, aad conformed apparently to the 

following. 


CHAP. XI. 1-38. 177 


See eee ee  -------ςοΞοοοῸοςςςςς- 





13 Ver, 28.—Rec. has ἐπισύστασις : Lachm. and Meyer, with some excellent authorities [with B. Ὁ. F. Sin., e¢. al., and 


4 cursives], have ἐπίστασις. 
is found there. 
the connection certainly seems to require, [so Chrysost.: 
ἔφοδοι: 


The former was probably derived from Acts xxiv. 12, [πὰ yet the same variation of reading 
The two words are often used in the same sense, but ἐπισύστ. can be taken only ina hostile sense, which 
οἱ θόρυβοι, ai tapaxal, at πολιορκίαι τῶν δήμων καὶ τῶν πόλεων 
the tumults, the disturbances, the assaults of mobs, the onsets of cities. 


So also the Greek expositors generally- 


This word, too, as Tisch. suggests, seems much less likely to have been changed for ἐπίστ. than the contrary ]. 
1£ Ver. 23.—Instead of μοι some MSS. have pov (Rec.); but it was probably an emendation. on 
16 Ver, 31.—The ἡμῶν after κυρίου, and χριστοῦ after Ἰησοῦ are probably both additions to the original. [B. F. Sin 


ymit both; and others omit one of them}. 
16 Ver, 32.—After muagace με, some MSS. add θέλων. 


It is probably an exeget. addition [and yet Sin., εὖ al.,andsome 


Greek Fathers have it, while B. the Vulg. Syr. and Arm. versions, and a few of the Lat. writers omit it, and some MSS. 


and versions place it before, muda με]. 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 1-4. Would that ye could beara 
little folly from me. Nay, indeed, ye do 
bear with me; for I am jealous of you 
with a godly jealousy.—The Apostle now felt 
compelled, in order to recover the respect he had 
once enjoyed in Corinth, and to destroy those in- 
fluences which were utterly inconsistent with it, 
to maintain that his position in the Church was 
not only equal but far superior to that of those 
who disparaged him. This commendation of 
himself, to which he stooped in condescension to 
them and as a matter of duty to himself and the 
cause of truth he ironically calls a “folly,” be- 
cause it seemed to give undue importance to that 
which was insignificant and connected only with 
outward appearances. He therefore entreats 
them to bear with him, although he might seem 
for a while to contradict the principle he had just 
laid down.—'OgeAov 1 Cor. iv. 8. [The word is 
a shortened form of the Imperfect for ὥφελον 
(which some MSS. have instead), and in the later 
Greek it was used as an interjection like «ive, to 
express a wish. Its tense implies an incomplete 
action still in its course and not yet come to its 
perfection (WrsBsTER, p. 88, WiNnER, 2 42,n. 2). 
It is connected with verbs in the Indicative. here 
with the Imperfect]. ᾿Ανεΐχεσϑε is the Hellenis- 
tic, and ἠνείχεσϑε the classical form.—The im- 
perfect (not equivalent to the pluperfect) is an 
ironical intimation of the boldness of the desire 
expressed, and implies that he could hardly ex- 
pect its realization.—If we read (with de Wette, 
Fritzsche) τῇ ἀφροσύνῃ, μου would have to be go- 
verned by aveiyeote, a construction common in 
the New Testament, though unusual in the clas- 
sic writers. Μικρόν has the sense of: a little, 
and the dative τῇ ἀφροσύνῃ signifies: in respect 
to foolishness. But according to the best sup- 
ported reading ov is not dependent upon ἀνείχ- 
zoe but upon μικρόν τι ἀφροσύνης, before which it 
is placed that it may become emphatic [my small 
degree of folly]. Such an emphasis makes the 
insertion of an ‘‘also” unnecessary. In μου 
μικρόν τι there is probably a slight reference to 
the great folly of those boastful opponents which 
they had already endured. [ἄφρων is one who 
does not rightly use his powers. Hence Bengel 
says that it isa milder word than μωρία which 
implies a folly of a perverse or wicked kind. The 
fault of the ἄφρων (ἀφροσύνη) is imprudence or 
rashness (Mark vil. 22)].—The doubt which 
after allis apparent in ἀνείχεσϑε (that ye could 
or would bear) supplies an occasion for the 
expression of confidence when he adds, ‘but 
indeed ye do bear with me.”” The object of ἀλλὰ 
is to correct the impression, which the wish he 
had just expressed might have produced, as if 
there were any doubt on the point: I need 
have no such desire, for you are already doing 








this very thing. Καί has an intensive force: 
even, in fact. ᾿Ανέχεσϑε is not in the Imperative 
but in the Indicative: but you are in fact bear- 
ing, etc.,] for as a request it would be feeble, and 
as a command unsuitable to the spirit of the con- 
text.—In ver. 2 a reason is given for the expec- 
tation he had just expressed in ver. 1. They had 
good reasons for the ἀνέχεσϑε, inasmuch as the 
folly alluded to, had its origin not in a regard 
for his own interest or in pride, but in a Divine 
zeal for their welfare and for Christ’s honor. 
(BENGEL: [amantes videntur amentes, lovers usual- 
ly seem out of their wits]; comp. chap. v. 13). 
The word ζηλοῦν refers here to the jealousy of 
love, the object of which is in the accusative 
(γυναῖκα, Numb. v. 14: Kecles. ix. 1). He was 
jealous of the Church in behalf of Christ (to 
whom he, as the one who had made the match, 
had espoused it), lest it should prove unfaithful, 
and be drawn off by seducing teachers from the 
simple dependence on Christ which his gospel 
had awakened in their hearts. He calls this 
feeling a zeal of God (ϑεοῦ ζήλῳ), which signifies 
here, not as in Rom. x. 2, a zeal in behalf of 
God (gen. obj.), for the feeling was properly in 
behalf of Christ; not merely one which came 
from or was produced by God; and still less 
qualitatively, a very great or holy zeal; but such 
a zealas God has (gen. subj.). This zeal was 
felt by God, inasmuch as He was exceedingly de- 
sirous that the bride, whom He had provided for 
the Son, who acts in His name, should remain 
constant in herattachment; and it was of course 
felt also by those ministers through whose in- 
strumentality this Divine work had been accom- 
plished. With respect to this zeal of God (among 
men, jealousy) as the Husband of His people, 
comp. Isa. liv. 5; Ixii. 5; Jer. iii. 1, efe.; Ezek. 
xvi. 8, e¢c.; xxiii. 1, efe.; Hos. ii. 19.—The ree- 
son for his use of this expression he now pro- 
ceeds to give when he adds (ver. 2)—For I 
have espoused you to one Husband, that 
I might present you as a chaste virgin to 
Christ.—The word ἁρμόζειν when applied to the 
conjugal relation signifies, to betroth, to marry. 
—The middle voice in other places signifies, to 
betroth one’s self; but among the more recent 
writers it has the same meaning as the active, 
and especially denotes the act of him who was 
instrumental in forming the engagement and who 
among the Jews always continued the medium of 
intercourse between the contracting parties. 
Comp. John iii. 29 [and ‘‘Chrysostom’s epithet 
on the Apostle : νυμφαγωγὸς τῆς οἰκουμένης (Stan- 
ley)], (not the guardian who had the charge of 
the education of the maiden, as if ἁρμόζειν were 
equivalent to preparare, ornare; nor the father 
who made the contract for her);—The words to 
one husband, are emphatic, in contrast with their 
dependence upon their party leaders. The de- 
sign which the espousal was intended to accom- 
plish was to present to Christ a chaste virgity 


178 
He here gives the name of the one husband. 
The idea of virginal purity is especially promi- 
nent in the epithet chaste, on which the empha- 
sis must be placed. The presentation refers to 


the period of the second advent (parousia), | 


when the union of the Church with Christ 
will be completely realized (the marriage Sup- 
per of the Lamb). It is one part of this ex- 
clusive devotion of the Bride to her Lord, that 
she should remain chaste (ἁγνότης). [The an- 
cient Fathers had much to say of the virgin purity 
of the Church, and of the duty of each Christian 
as a part of Christ’s betrothed Church to main- 
tain ‘‘virginitas mentis,” which Avgustine defines 
to be ‘‘integra fides, solida spes, sincera charitas.” 
Such views were striking in distinction from the 
spiritual polygamy and pollutions of heathenism 
and ancient heresy. Comp. Wordsworth]. In 
contrast with this endeavor on the part of the 
Apostle, he now mentions the danger which 
had awakened his fears:—but I fear lest, 
peradventure, as the serpent completely 
beguiled Eve by his many arts, so your 
minds might be led away from the simpli- 
city which is in Christ (ver. 3). Νοήματα 
occurred also in chap. iii. 14; x. 5, and here 
signifies the mind itself, especially those faculties 
by which we think and will; for in the present 
case the reference is evidently to an impurity 
both in the intellect and in the will—a departure 
from the pure Gospel and a disturbance of their 
entire surrender of themselves to Christ. Beck 
(Seelen/. 52f.) makes it the corruption of all the 
spiritual powers of the soul, inasmuch as the 
thoughts and purposes are drawn away from the 
simplicity of truth by deluding the understanding 
with sophistries and the heart with vain hopes. 
The words φθαρῇ ἀπό are a constructio pregnans, 
and signify, to be led astray, ¢. e., to be brought 
off from any thing. The verb φϑείρεσϑαι is sig- 
nificant, for it was not unfrequently appropriated 
to the destruction of virginal chastity (vitiare). 
In the present instance this spiritual chastity is 
called a simplicity in respect to Christ (εἰς χριστόν) 
because it implied a simple dependence upon 
Christ. He illustrates this by a comparison with 
the temptation of Eve by the Serpent; in which 
the points of comparison are: 1, the feminine 
character of the Church (παρϑένος), and 2, the in- 
fluence of Satan in both instances. He presumes 
that his readers were well acquainted with, and 
believed in, the seductive influence of Satan 
through the Serpent upon the woman, Gen. iii.; 
comp. John viii. 44; Rev. xii. 9, 14-17; xx..2; 1 
John iii. 8. [Wordsworth finds in ver. 3 ‘a clear 
assertion of the reality of the appearance of Satan 
in the form of a Serpent to Eve in Paradise,” and 
we may add that we have the Apostle’s sanction to 
the historical nature and accuracy of the history 
in Gen. iii. 1ff. In ἐξαπατάω. which the Apostle 
uses both here and in 1 Tim. ii. 14, the ἐκ 
strengthens the idea of the deception. He thus 
expresses the thorough deception which passed 
upon the woman, and which he feared might 
take place among the Corinthians. Comp. Elli- 
cotton 1 Tim. ii. 14]. But thoge who had se- 
duced the Corinthian Church are expressly 
called the ministers of Satan in ver. 15. 
Tlavovpyia suggests the various arts of deception 
and the false shows made use of by the Judaistic 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





teachers, when they substituted their doctrine 
of the law for the pure Gospel Paul had preached. 
(Whether a Gnostic element was mingled with 
their instructions, and whether rhetorical and 
dialectic arts were employed in enforcing them, 
may be left undecided.—Forif indeed he who 
is coming were preaching another Jesus 
whom we preached not, or ye were receiv- 
ing another Spirit which ye accepted not, 
ye might well bear with him (ver. 4). This 
verse presents more than common difficulties, 
especially with reference to its connection with 
what precedes and what follows it. Some con- 
tend that the Apostle is here ironically giving the 
reasons for the solicitude he had expressed in ver. 
8. “For if my opponents teach and work among 
you things which are entirely new, you might 
well be pleased with them.’’ The idea expressed 
in plain terms would then be: ‘ye would, in fact, 
have reason to be much displeased with such no- 
velties.” By his ironical reproach he would 
thus show what reason he had for anxiety on 
acount of their complaisance toward those false 
Apostles. His reason for reproving them for 
such a complaisance he presents in ver. 5. Thus 
Meyer. In like manner, Osiander, though he 
explains καλῶς to mean: ‘you endure them 
finely; you find much delight in them, imagining 
perhaps that you will acquire some honor frem 
them;” and he makes the Apostle give in ver. 5 
the reason for the ironical reproach in ver. 4, by 
directly denying there the hypothesis on which 
they had claimed superiority over him, viz., be- 
cause they had first preached the true Jesus and 
brought among the Corinthians the true Spirit 
and the true Gospel: ‘If, therefore, my oppo- 
nents could claim superiority over me on this 
account, you might well be pleased with them. 
But such a claim is an empty assumption; for,’ 
ete. On this interpretation, καλῶς has a more 
appropriate meaning, and the connection with 
the preceding context is more obvious, but 
the idea of denying what had been  sup- 


posed in ver. 4, has something artificial in it.- 


If no such irony is allowed in ver. 4, its 
connection with ver. 5, is still more difficult: ‘if 
he who presents himself preaches another, ¢. e., 
a better Jesus, efc., you may very properly be 
pleased with him; but this is not so.” In this 
case the connection with ver. 3 is not plain, un- 
less we add yet further: ‘‘such an endurance is 
not well and I have good reason for my solici- 
tude.’’ The reason for his implied assertion that 
this was not so, would then be given more fully 
in ver. 5.—In καλῶς ἀνείχεσϑε we have an appa- 
rent reference to the ἀνέχεσϑε of ver. 1. In the 
first place he tells them what reason they had for 
bearing with him: (ver. 2, ζηλῶ yap—his reason 
for this he then gives further: ἡρμοσάμην---φοβοῦ- 
μαι d?.)\—Now he says that after seeing how 
they had acted toward others, he surely had rea- 
son to expect such a forbearance from them. If 
the man who had come to them (among them) 
was preaching another Jesus, altogether differ- 
ent from the one he had preached, efe., they 
might well find the greatest delight in him, @. e., 
they might find the utmost conceivable pleasure 
in his adversaries. Butif this were so, he sure- 
ly had reason to expect that they would tolerate 
him and a little folly on his part; since he was 


Ὡς ἢ 


CHAP. XI. 1-38. 


179 





in no respect inferior to these super-eminent 
Apostles (ver. 5). In this case we only need to 
retain a constant recollection of what had. been 
said in the leading sentence (ver. 1), to gain a 
consistent connection for the whole passage. No 
actual occurrence would be introduced by εἰ, but 
only a supposable though extreme case: an alter- 
ation of the fundamental principles of Christian- 
ity. In the apodosis or conclusion, he intro- 
duces a sentence of a different construction 
(ἀνείχεσϑε), but one which not unfrequently is 
found in classic writers. In such an apodosis 
the ἄν falls away, if the object is to imply that 
there was something surer and necessary, unless 
some circumstances to prevent it should take 
place, or if nothing is spoken of except what 
must have taken place according to the supposi- 
tion (Passow, ἄν, ἢ. 1.). [ιν πα, ὃ 43. 2.] Had 
he said in the protasis: éxjpvocev, etc., he would 
have implied that the whole supposition was an 
impossibility, and this is an assertion which he 
does not wish to make. The idea is: in the case 
supposed, you would indeed have been well 
pleased. He thus intimates that such a case was 
not an actual reality.—The present tense in the 
protasis does not compel us to take ἀνείχεσϑε as 
a simple prawterite: ‘‘you made yourselves well 
pleased,’ thus expressing a real displeasure or 
only a compulsory satisfaction; nor as a ques- 
tion (‘‘have you reason to be pleased with him?’”’) 
[The leading verbs in the conditional clauses 
(κηρύσσει, λαμβάνετε) were each in the present, 
and we should naturally have expected that in 
the conclusion (apodosis) the verb would have 
been in the present also: (dvéyeove, ye bear with 
him). But instead of this the Apostle designedly 
softens the expression by saying (ἀνείχεσϑελ): 
‘<ye might well bear with him.”’ In this way he 
avoids saying directly that they had actually 
borne with the assumptions of their false 
teachers.] Ὁ ἐρχόμενος in this connection does 
not signify that he who comes first must of course 
be the best, but simply that he who comes makes 
his appearance; the presence of his opponents 
is conceived of as the coming forward of a single 
person (Meyer). [Wordsworth: ‘6 épy. is, he 
who cometh, i. e., he who is not sent with a re- 
gular ordination and mission. This is the true 
character of an unauthorized teacher. This one 
sends himself, in contrast with the Apostle who is 
sent by another, viz. by Christ.” ] “AAAov as ap- 
plied to Jesus, is a mere denial of identity and 
the meaning therefore is: if he so preaches that 
the Jesus preached does not seem the same as 
the one before preached. (Not: χριστόν, for 
then he would imply that some other one than 
Jesus was the true Messiah.)—’Erepov on the 
other hand, as applied to the gospel, signifies 
something different in nature or kind, comp. 
Acts iv. 12, Gal. i. 6, 7.--- πδέξασϑε has not the 
same meaning with ἐλάβετε (to receive), but it 
signifies to accept, and refers to the time when 
they were converted. [Bengel says that this 
change of verbs was because ‘‘man is passive in 
receiving the Spirit but active in accepting the 
gospel.” ]—As in the relative sentence the em- 
phasis lies upon the negation, there is no ἡμεῖς 
or ὑμεῖς.---Τὰ the words ἄλλον, and ἕτερον it is 


spoken of was more excellent in the estimation 
of the Apostle’s opponents. By ἕτερον πνεῦμα we 
are also not to understand the spirit produced in 
the heart by the preaching of the law, viz., the’ 
spirit of fear (Rom. viii. 15), or the spirit of the 
world (1 Cor. ii 12), ar more definitely, the 
earthly spirit of a party; and by ἕτερον evayy. 
(scil. λαμβάνετε), those institutions or instruc- 
tions which came wholly from men, etc.—[ He had 
given two reasons for bearing with him, viz., the 
jealousy which he, as the friend of Christ (the 
paranymph) might reasonably be expected to . 
feel for them, and their easy toleration of those 
who were preaching something like another gos- 
pel; and] he now proceeds in ver. 5 to show 
that if they could take such extreme pleasure in 
his opponents, they had some good reason for 
enduring him (comp. above), since he was in no 
respect inferior to them. He now specifies some 
particulars. 

Vers. 5,6. For I think that in no re- 
spect have I been behind these very su- 
perior apostles —The word λογίζομαι denotes 
the result of careful reflection and probably has 
in this place still a delicate ironical tinge (Osian- 
der).—In the negative μηδὲν ὑστερηκέναι (the per- 
fect reaching forward into the present) there is 
a modest reserve, inasmuch as he really had 
reason to boast of a positive superiority. But 
the μηδὲν forbids a limitation of the expression to 
anything of a partial nature. The words ὑπερλίαν 
ἄπόστολοι, however, both in this place and in 
chap. xii, 11, must apply to his opponents, pre- 
viously designated by ἐρχόμενος and afterwards 
more particularly characterized in vers. 13-15. 
According to Neander the Apostle intended by 
this compound word (ὑπερλίαν) to designate the 
extravagant importance which was attributed to 
or assumed by these false teachers, comp. ver. 13. 
The whole connection is inconsistent with the 
interpretation prevalent in the ancient church, 
which applied the phrase to the principal Apos- 
tles, Peter, James and John (Gal. ii. 9), and 
which the Protestants very generally accepted in 
their controversy with the Romanists on the sub- 
ject of Peter’s primacy. Even if the expression 
contained nothing but praise rather than a bitter 
reproach, it would be entirely out of place in the 
argument.—But though I be perhaps rude 
in speech, I am not soin knowledge; but 
in every respect inregard to you we have 
been thoroughly made manifest among all 
men (ver. 6).—The Apostle here introduces a de- 
tailed explanation of what he had said in ver. 5, 
with a concession that in one respect there might 
be an exception to what he had just said, inas- 
much as his opponents might pride themselves on 
a kind of eloquence gained in the schools. This 
concession, however, he would not extend beyond 
the manner of discourse subordinate to that which 
ought to be the main point with an Apostle, wz., 
the γνῶσις, the knowledge or perception of Di- 
vine truth (chap. x.5; ii. 14), The word ἰδιώτης, 
1 Cor. xiv. 16, signifies a beginner, a bungler, 
an uneducated one who has no skill for the work 
in hand. [It does not deny any amount of edu- 
cation or skill on other or general matters. It 
signifies rather a man not professionally ac- 


implied that the subjects compared are entirely | quainted with that which he undertakes (Alford). 
different from one another, and not that the thing | Such a one might possibly perform the part as-. 


180 


signed him even better than those who were 
trained to it, but he would do it in ways not 
taught in the regular schools. Paul was in 
reality a powerful speaker (Acts xix. 12; xxii. 1; 
xxiv. 10; xxvi. 2; xvii. 22), but he did not speak 
in the methods usually practised by professional 
orators. WessTer’s Synn. p. 215, and TRENCH, 
Synn. 2d Part, p.152]. The occasion for such a 
reproach may be seen (comp. chap. x. 10) in 1 
Cor. i. 17; ii. 1, 4. The Apostle was an impres- 
sive but not an artificial orator. When he says, 
we have been thoroughly made manifest, etc., he passes 
as he often does in this epistle and in his other 
writings (e.g. chap, v. 11; x. 11; 1 Thess, iii. 
4, 5) from the use of the singular to that of the 
plural (gavepwiévréc); from the individual to the 
collective or collegial form of expression. If 
φανερώσαντες be adopted as the true reading αὐτήν 
(γνῶσιν) must be understood. [The recent addi- 
tion of the authority of the Sinaiticus to that 
which before was so strong in favor of this read- 
ing almost compels us to adopt it. Alford accepts 
of it and renders the clause thus: But in every 
matter we made things manifest, t. e., he made the 
things of the Gospel (not as our author suggests, 
his knowledge itself) known among all men].— 
The connection with ver. 7 will not permit us to 
refer φανερωϑέντες to γνῶσιν for what is there 
presupposed as well as what is implied in ἐν 
παντί (in the sense of: in every respect, not: at 
all times) requires a more general assertion. 
We see no need of supplying: ‘‘as an Apostle 
and an upright man,” or anything of a similar 
kind to define more particularly what he meant 
by φανερωϑέντες ; for the specification of what he 
intended was very obvious. In every respect, so 
far as you are concerned, we have been quite 
manifest among (with) all men; 7. 6. what we 
are to you, and what advantage you have derived 
from us is well known to every one (Meyer). 
The phrase εἰς ὑμῖν cannot mean among you, as 
in the A. V., for that would have required év 
ὑμῖν (Hodge)].—The second ἀλλ᾽ introduces not 
a second conclusion or apodosis, but something 
contrasted with ov τῇ γνώσει, and it is called for 
by the transition to a more general assertion 
which includes the possession of the γνῶσις. ---- 
Mistaking this, some have connected it with ver. 
5, in such a way as to include ei—yvéoer in a 
parenthesis. This is not only unnecessary, but 
it deprives what is asserted in the parenthesis of 
all appropriate signification. After φανερωϑέντες, 
we may supply ἐσμέν from the context, so that 
the general meaning will be: ‘not however with 
respect to knowledge, for in every respect are 
we manifest; or, we are plainly known,” efe.— 
᾽ν πᾶσιν after ἐν παντί is in the masculine and 
not in the neuter: [7.¢.in all things among all 
men].—From the ἐν παντί he now proceeds to se- 
lect and give special prominence and vividness 
to one point, viz., the unselfishness of his whole 
life while he was at Corinth, ver. 7ff. [It would 
have been natural for him now to have gone on 
to speak of his knowledge, by means of Divine 
revelations, e/c., but the use of φανερωϑέντες had 
suggested to him one of the charges made against 
him at Corinth, and he now proceeds immediately 
to answer this, leaving his “boast” of knowledge 
in spiritual things to be pursued afterwards 
(chap. xii.). This charge was that he had taken 











THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





no money from the Corinthians but had supported 
himself by his own labors; and from this his 
enemies had insinuated: 1, that if he had beena 
real Apostle he would have claimed a support as 
his right; 2, that it indicated a want of confi- 
dence in his brethren there; and 3, that he was 
now making his former disinterestedness a cover 
for large collections under Titus, ostensibly for 
the poor, but really for himself. The first two 
of these objections, as they bore on his affection 
and open dealing with the Corinthians, he answers 
immediately, but the third he does not notice till 
further on, chap. xii. 15-18. See Stanley]. 
Vers. 7-12. Or have I committed an of- 
fence in abasing myself that ye might be 
exalted, because I preached unto you the 
gospel of God without charge ?—['The par- 
ticle 7 is not rendered in our Eng. versions, and yet 
it is expressive as marking a transition to a new 
objection by his oppcnents (Hodge)]. The Corin- 
thians would necessarily understand the Apostle, 
when.he asserted that he had been made mani- 
fest among them, as in every respect maintaining 
that he had behaved himself honorably among 
them. This induces him to raise the question 
given in ver. 7. As the object of this question 
is to ward off from himself a very foul reproach, 
it implies a very painful and bitter reproof. His 
opponents probably represented his gratuitous 
labors and his earning of his own support by his 
daily toil, as a letting down of his apostolic dig- 
nity, not merely a defect and a violation of de- 
cency, but as an ἁμαρτία [a transgression of 
established law], as a refusal of the dignity 
and position which God had assigned him, 
and perhaps also as a contempt for the Co-. 
rinthians themselves by scorning to receive any 
thing from them. The relation of the follow.. 
ing sentences to the principal proposition and 
to one another has been variously explained, 
The two sentences, ταπεινῶι ἐμαυτόν, etc., and 
ὅτι---ὑμῖν, may be cobrdinated [so as to be twa 
forms of expressing the same thought] and may 
be thus regarded as a misrepresentation: 1, of 
the Apostle’s humility; and 2, of his disinterest- 
edness. On the other hand, the first sentence may 
be taken as the essential part of his offence, and 
the second as an epexegesis of the first. Or, 
finally, ὅτι---ὑμῖν may be regarded as the proper 
substance of the objection, and ταπεινῶν, efc., as 
describing, in a parenthesis, or in a transposed 
or hyperbatic sentence, the character of the act 
of preaching the Gospel without support (asif he 
had said: because humbling myself, 1 preached 
the Gospel without charge). The correct way 
undoubtedly is to make the one sentence subor- 
dinate to and not codrdinate with the other; and 
then the best, and probably the easiest, way is 
to take the participial sentence as a parenthesis 
[: Have I committed an offence in abasing my- 
self, because I preached, efc.]. It is, however, 
not to be resolved into: while I was abasing my- 
self (Meyer). By the words abasing myself that 
ye might be exalted, which he brings forward to 
the earlier part of the sentence, he shows how 
he thought his gratuitous preaching might be 
and ought to be regarded. His opponents looked 
upon it as an act of self-degradation, whereas it 
deserved to be esteemed an act of affectionate 
self-renunciation, an abstaining from the assers 


SS ΔΣ,...: 


—s 


CHAP. XI. 1-33. 


181 


ro OOO an 


tion of an acknowledged right (1 Cor. ix. 4), and 
a supporting himself by the work of his own 
hands (Acts xviii. 3), to which he submitted for 
their good (iva ὑμεῖς ὑψωϑῆτε). The exaltation at 
which he aimed was not merely that of general 
prosperity, but a spiritual elevation from the 
depths of a sinful corruption to the heights of a 
Christian salvation. In the words, preaching 
the Gospel without charge, we have a refined 
contrast between whatis gratuitous and what is 
of the utmost possible cost and value (τοῦ ϑεοῦ is 
here the gen. aucioris). [MeryER: ‘observe the 
collocation of the words dup. τ. τ. ϑεοῦ evayy.: the 
Divine or most precious Gospel for nothing.” ]—I 
spoiled other churches, receiving wages 
from them, that I might minister to you 
(ver. 8). The idea contained in δωρεὰν he here 
more fully carries out; and he places in contrast 
with the Corinthian Churchsome churches (the 
Macedonian, comp. ver. 9), on whom he had 
made demands, in order that he might serve 
them (officially, εὐαγγελιζόμενος). ᾿Εσύλησα is a 
strong expression and calculated to awaken 
shame in the hearts of those to whom he wrote, 
inasmuch as it implies that others in straitened 
circumstances had been reduced to want iv order 
to do them a favor (comp. viii. 2). The word is 
more particularly explained when he comes to 
say ὀψώνιον λαβών (1 Cor. ix. 7), which signifies 
wages for service performed for a livelihood. 
This he received while he was doing service for 
the Corinthians; it was contributed, not for the 
poor, like that mentioned in chap. viii. 4; ix. 1, 
but for the promotion of their spiritual welfare. 
[Curysostom: ‘he did not say took, but robbed, 
ἢ. 6., 1 stripped them bare and made them poor. 
And, what is surely greater, it was not for 
superfluities, but for the supply of his necessi- 
ties ; for when he says wages he means necessary 
subsistence. And, what is more grievous yet, to 
do you service’’]. He first speaks of what was 
needful during his journey to Corinth, and while 
establishing himself there. Immediately after- 
wards he speaks of his condition while residing 
there.—And when I was present with 
you and was in want, I was charge- 
able to no man (ver. 9a). When I also suf- 
fered want (καὶ ὑστερηθείς), when I became des- 
titute (ὑστερεῖσϑαι in Luke xv. 14, καὶ concessive), 
when, particularly, what I had brought with me 
was exhausted, and what I could earn was not 
sufficient. Καταναρκᾷν τινος (I was chargeable to 
no one) occurs also in chap. xii. 13, 14). [Worps- 
wortH: ‘‘The metaphor is from the fish, νάρκη, or 
torpedo, which attaches itself to other creatures 
and produces torpor in that to which it attaches 
itself, and then endeavors to derive nourishment 
from it. ‘I was not,’ says Paul, ‘like a torpedo 
to any among you’”’]. According to Hesychius, 
the word has the sense of βαρύνειν, properly to 
grow torpid, and so to press down upon any one. 
Jerome speaks of it as a Cilician expression, 
meaning gravare; in this place to be a burden to 
any one by relying upon him forsupport. Others 
regard it as meaning here: to be inactive in my 
duties. Οὐδενός in the sense of: to no one’s dis- 
advantage [2. ¢., not enough to injure any one], 
would not be appropriate in this passage (comp. 
ver. 9), nor in chap. xii. 13, 14.-For that which 
was lacking to me the brethren which 











came from Macedonia supplied. (ver. 93.) 
—This was the way in which he avoided being 
burdensome. The words need not be regarded 
as a parenthesis [as in Alford and Stanley]. 
Προσαναπληροῦν ὑστέρημά occurs also in chap. ix. 
12. Asin all this connection no allusion is made 
to the Apostle’s supporting himself by his own 
earnings, we may reasonably doubt whether the 
πρὸς in this compound verb contains any hint of 
the kind, as if it implied an addition to what he 
earned. We rather understand by it an addition 
to the small amount which he perhaps yet pos- 
sessed, or that which was necessary to complete 
what he lacked. The brethren here mentioned 
were possibly Silas and Timotheus, who we know 
actually came to him from Macedonia (Acts xviii. 
5), and may have brought with them additional 
means for his support. The Corinthians knew 
very well whom he meant. Phil. iv. 15 Jhas no 
reference to this transaction. It is very likely 
that he had some reference to such means of 
support when he goes on—in every thing 
Ihave kept myself from being burden- 
some to you, and so will I keep myself. 
(ver. 9c.)—That is, he had always kept from be- 
ing burdensome to them in any way, and 
he now announces that this would be his 
[rinciple of action for the future (καὶ τερήσω). 
This was said that they might not think he was 
reminding them of these things in order to in- 
duce them afterwards to contribute to his sup- 
port, or to establish some claim upon them for 
another time. This assurance he further con- 
firms by a solemn affirmation—As the truth 
of Christ is in me, this boasting shall 
not be closed against me in the regions 
of Achaia (ver. 10). A _ similar expres- 
sion is found in chapter i. 18 and Rom. ix. 
1. He pledges the truth of Christ which 
dwelt within him and which was pure truth- 
fulness, in opposition to all hypocrisy or false- 
hood, as the security or warrant for what he 
was asserting, viz. that this boast (about keeping 
himself free in future, καὶ τηρήσω, should never be 
suppressed; ὁ. e., that he would always so con- 
duct himself that no one would be able to con- 
tradict him when he confidently maintained that 
his life had been and should be unselfish. [ Al- 
ford (with whom Dr. Hodge agrees) maintains 
that there is no oath or even solemn aflirmation 
here, but that the expression is exactly analo- 
gous to that in Rom. ix. 1, and signifies: ‘‘the 
truth of Christ is in me, that, efc.; 7. e., I speak 
according to that truth of which Christ Himself 
was our example, when I say that,” efc.]. The 
metaphor in ¢payqoera is essentially neither that 
of a road hedged in, nor of a stream dammed up, 
but a φράσσειν στόμα, i. e., a stopping of the mouth, 
inasmuch as καί χησισ is talking in a loud tone 
(comp. Rom. iii. 19; Heb. xi. 33; Ps. evil. 42; Job. 
v. 16; 2 Mace. xiv. 36). The καύχησις is personified. 
Its mouth shall not be stopped, it shall never be 
put to silence. Εἰς ἐμέ is here simply, in respect 
to me, not adversatively, as if he had meant, for 
my injury or in spite of me. In ἐμέ also may be 
perceived a silent contrast to those with whom it 
would be very different. ‘The truth of Christ is in 
me,” contains nearly the same idea with that which 
asserted that the life of Christ was in him, and 
other expressions of a like nature Gal. ii. 20; 1 


182 


Cor. ii. 16; Rom. viii. 9-12) Olshausen’s inter- 
pretation: ‘as trulyas Tama Christian,”’ is not 
in accordance with the spirit of the words. Riic- 
kert’s explanation, on the other hand: * This 
assertion, that my boasting shall never be taken 
from me, is the truth of Christ in me, ἢ, é., 18 as 
surely true as if Christ Himself asserted it,” is 
rather forced. Instead of saying ἐν ὑμῖν, he 
more solemnly and beautifully says, in the regions 
of Achaia (ἐν τοῖς κλίμαςιν τῆς ᾿Αχαΐας. MEYER). 
Κλίματα means a district or a region of country, 
and it occurs also in Rom. xv. 28; Gal. i. 21. It 
was very possible for Paul’s readers to ex- 
plain this assertion so as to make it an indication 
of his aversion to them and estrangement from 
them, inasmuch as love usually receives with 
readiness what is offered by a beloved one, and 
even what is done from a different motive. He 
guards against such a construction when he sub- 
joins—Wherefore? Because I love you 
not? God knoweth (ver. 11).—He calls God 
to witness that his resolution to receive nothing 
from them, sprung not from any defect of love to- 
wardthem. He then proceeds (in ver. 12a). to ex- 
plain positively the object he had in view, and the 
reasons which moved him in this whole affair.— 
But what I thus am doing, I will also con- 
tinue to do, that I may cut off the occa- 
sion from those who desire an occasion. 
—He refers once more to this matter in 6 dé 
ποιῶ, καὶ ποιήσω, Which is not a single proposition, 
corresponding to ἐτήρησα and τηρήσω in ver. 9, 
for in that case διὰ τοῦτο ποιῶ OY ποιῶ καὶ ποιήσω 
would have to be understood. The assurance 
refers to his future course, and this makes it 
necessary that καὶ ποιήσω should be the conclud- 
ing proposition of the sentence (MEYER). A τοῦτο 
before it can very well be dispensed with. He 
thus testifies that he had had his eye upon his 
opponents in this affair, and that his object had 
been that no one should be able to allege that he 
thus showed that he had no affection for the 
Church. This he expresses in a final sentence: 
that I may cut off the occasion, ete. 
designates the particular matter with respect to 
which his adversaries wished to assail him; the 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


$$$ 


By ἀφορμήν he | 





occasion for making an attack upon him. Ac- 
cording to the context this must refer to his dis- 
interestedness. When he took nothing from the 
Corinthian Church, his object had been to de- 
prive his opponents of all power to disparage 
him for his want of this disinterestedness. In 
τὴν ἀφορμήν the article implies, this precise occa- 
sion. The last ἀφορμῆν, without the article, sig- 
nifies, any occasion in general.—that wherein 
they glory, they may be found even as we 
(ver. 126) —Some connect this second final sen- 
tence with the first, and regard ἐν ὦ καυχῶνται as a 
parenthesis, referring to εὑρεϑῶσι καϑὼς καὶ ἡμεῖς. 
[This goes on the supposition that they them- 
selves took money of the Corinthians, and de- 
sired that the Apostles should do so ‘in order 
that (in this matter on which they boasted) we 
might be found even as they’’]. In opposition 
to this it must be recollected, that they pretended 
to be superior to Paul. It may, however, be 
sail that his opponents regarded the reception 
of money as an apostolic prerogative, and hence 
that this was the object of their καυχᾶσϑαι (1 Cor. 
ix. 7 ff.) [:**from those who desire occasion that 





in this apostolic right of which they boast, they 


might be found even as we,” ἡ, 6., they desired — 


that we should receive money as an apostolic 
right, that thus they and we might stand before 
the people on the same level of apostolical au- 
thority in the matter of receiving a maintenance 
SraNLey). 
final clause is made dependent upon the first, 
and thus expressive of the desires of Paul’s an- 
tagonists], the whole passage assumes an ironi- 
cal tinge, and implies that, although they would 
willingly allow him to participate in their boast, 
it was only that they might thus conceal their 
own shame, and deprive him of his just fame 
(OxsHAusEN). But such a view of the passage 
is justified neither by what is said in 1 Cor. ix. 
7ff. (where no allusion is made to any such as- 
sertions of his opponents), nor by our context. 
In such a case also the words ought to have 
been εὑρεϑῶμεν---αὐτοί. The correct construction 
would seem to be to codrdinate the second final 
sentence with the first [7 e., regard both as ex- 
pressive of the Apostle’s design in keeping him- 
self as he was], and yet this seems to imply that 
these opponents actually received nothing from 
the people, and prided themselves upon that fact, 
and endeavored to make it a ground for triumph- 
ing over the Apostle. Paul, in this case, says 
that he had given such a direction to his con- 
duct that in this respect they should be found 
like himself, ἃ. e., that they should have no rea- 
son for preference to himself. Such an explana- 
tion, however, is opposed to what is contained 
ἴῃ γον. 20, 1 Cor. ix. 12, and to our context (ver. 
13), even if we pass over the necessity of giving 
to καϑὼς the strange meaning of, no better than. 
Besides, how could he urge upon their considera- 
tion his own gratuitous services among them, if 
his opponents were in the same position. [Alford 
proposes another interpretation. He finds the 
clue to it in ver. 18ff., where he thinks this 
καυχῶνται is again taken up and described as be- 
ing κατὰ σάρκα, and the καϑὼς καὶ ἡμεῖς is taken 
up by Ἑ βραῖοί εἰσιν; κἀγώ, ete. From this he 
thinks it manifest that the meaning of the pre- 
sent clause is: that in the matters of which they 
boast they may be found even as we, ἢ. 6., that 
we may be on a fair and equal footing. This, he 
thinks, affords a natural connection with the 
next verse, since the Apostle implies by the yap 
there that this would end in their discomfiture; 
for realities they had none, no weapons but mis- 


representation, they being false apostles, efc. 


The objection to this is, that before and after 


this verse the Apostle is not speaking of general — 


apostolic claims, but only of the specific point 
—that he had received no support from the Cor- 
inthians, and that he had declined to receive it 
that he might cut off occasion, efe.]. The correct 
presumption is, that they boasted of their own 
disinterestedness without reason, and that Paul 
was determined by a course of actual disinterest- 
edness, not only to cut off all occasion for impu- 
ting to him mercenary motives, but to compel 
them to assume a position in actual practice like 
his own (Meyer). The sordid spirit which is 
ascribed to them in ver. 13 shows that they had 
no good ground for boasting of their disinter- 
estedness, and we need not, therefore, with de 
Wette, assume that the point on which they 


But in whatever way this second — 





τὸ 


CHAP. XI. 1--88. 


183 





made their boast was their performances as 
apostles, for such a claim would have been too 
vague (comp. Meyer). He now shows (in vv. 
13-15) by his representation of their true char- 
acter, that he had had good reasons for such 
precautions with respect to them. 

Vers. 13-15. For such persons are false 
apostles, deceitful workers transforming 
themselves into Apostles of Christ.—In a 
very arbitrary manner some who interpret tva— 
καϑὼς καὶ ἡμξις in ver. 12 to mean ‘“‘no better 
than we,” interpolate in this place the thought: 
‘“‘but rather worse, for” etc. (Riickert.). The 
same must be said of the interpolation of the 
sentence: I doubt not that they employ such ar- 
tifices (as pretending that they receive no remu- 
neration), for” ete. (Billroth). Probably also 
the connection with ἵνα εὑρεϑῶσι which Meyer 
proposes: ‘not without reason do I make it my 
object that they may be found even as we in 
those things on which they make their boast: 
for the part these persons are acting is that of 
falsehood and deceit,” is rather too intimate.— 
The words δὲ τοιοῦτοι (such persons) form the 
subject, and ψευδαπόστολοι (false apostles) the 
predicate of the sentence. It is only in this way 
that they receive their: proper force as a disco- 
very of the true character of these teachers, and 
they thus form a harmonious whole with the re- 
maining predicates. If wevdar. be taken as the 
subject of the sentence, the object of οἱ τοιοῦτοι 
would be, what the course of the argument does 
not call for, to distinguish them from other false 
apostles, and the subject would be brought into 
too close contact with the predicates (Osiander). 
By such persons the Apostle intended the same 
as those who in ver. 12, are said to desire occa- 
sionand to boast. The false apostles were such as 
wished to be regarded as apostles, as men who 
had been commissioned perhaps as Paul was, by 
Christ Himself, and who therefore assumed the 
name and claimed to be called apostles. 
Whether they claimed to have seen Christ, or 
‘only to have been the true founders of the church 
at Corinth, is uncertain. In either case their 
claim was without foundation and contrary to 
actual facts, since they were obviously contend- 
ing for their own interests and not for Christ’s 
cause (comp. Osiander).—The second designa- 
tion, deceitful workers, (not workers of deceit, or 
such as busied themselves with deceit), has re- 
ference to their influence upon the people, lead- 
ing them astray by deceptive arts, having no 
care for the welfare of their hearers but pursu- 
ing their own selfish ends, and organizing parties 
in opposition to the Apostle, and to the true inte- 
rests of the congregation (perhaps also corrupting 
the doctrines of the gospel, comp. chap. ii. 17, 
iv. 2). ’Epydraz κακοί occurs in Phil. iii. 2, and 
the opposite ἐργάτην ἀνεπαίσχυντον in 2 Tim. ii. 
15.—[The middle part. μετασχηματιζόμενοι, signi- 
fies, changing for themselves their form into (as 
far as to) Apostles of Christ. Rey. ii. 2.] In 
saying that these pretended apostles did this, he 
intimates that their proper form was a very dif- 
ferent one, and rather that of messengers of Sa- 
tan, comp. vers. 14-15, (Osiander says: emissa- 
ries of men and of human factions—in opposition 
to the context), and of course that their repre- 
sentation of themselves as the messengers of 








Christ was a mere pretence assumed for the oc- 
casion.—W. F. Besser says: They disguised 
themselves a. in respect to doctrine, inasmuch ag 
they retained many words and names which be- 
longed to Christianity, but which were only like 
empty husks wrapped around some seeds which 
belonged not there; ὁ. in respect to conduct, in- 
asmuch as they outwardly imitated the works 
which Christ’s Apostles wrought, but they were 
destitute of that benevolence which constituted 
the perfection of a Christian’s doings (chap. v. 
12).—And no marvel; for Satan himself 
transforms himself into an angel of light. 
(ver. 14a).—The Apostle finds it altogether natural 
(ov Favua) that they should thus disguise them- 
selves, inasmuch as it was a matter of notoriety 
that their Master was wont to assume a garb alto- 
gether opposed to his proper character. [Milton 
has made use of the hint here given in Par. 
Lost. B. III. vv. 634-44.] The relative αὐτὸς is 
in contrast with οἱ διάκονοι αὐτοῦ of ver. 15.— 
Good angels are called angels of light, because 
their purity is a participation in God’s light (1 
John i. 5). This light has sometimes become 
perceptible to men, when such angels have made 
their appearance on earth (Matt. xxviii. 3, Acts 
xii. 7, et. al.). Satan, on the other hand is a 
dark power (comp. Eph. vi. 12, Acts xxvi. 18). 
We have no reason to maintain that the Apostle 
had his eye at this time upon any particular 
event like the temptation of the first man or of 
Christ ; much less that he was thinking (like the 
later Rabbins and others) of magical appear- 
ances of angels in radiant forms. The only ex- 
planation which is probable is that which refers 
it to certain moral and spiritual influences of a 
seductive character, under some splendid sem- 
blance of truth and goodness.—It is no great 
thing therefore if his ministers also should 
transform themselves, so as to seem to 
be ministers of righteousness (ver. 15).— 
In this way, he draws a conclusion from the 
greater to the less: if such is the conduct of the 
prince of darkness, it is no great matter (μέγα 1 
Cor. ix. 11), and therefore, nothing remarkable 
or extraordinary (therefore ov ϑαῦμα ver. 14), if 
his ministers undertake to do a similar thing. 
His ministers are those who prove to be his agents 
by their efforts to corrupt the work of God, and 
to disturb the churches.—Meracynuarifovra ὡς 
is equivalent to: εἰς τὸ ἔιναι ὡς. Righteousness 
represents in this passage a power in opposition 
to Satan, and his dark and unholy influence 
(comp. chap. vi. 7, 14).— Whose end shall be 
according to their works (ver. 15 ).—He 
thus finally, refers solemnly to the doom which 
such sinners must ultimately meet, inasmuch as 
the end of such servants of Satan must be accord- 
ing to their works, comp. Phil. iii. 19, Rom.vi. 21, 
1 Pet. iv. 17. The saintly form they have here as- 
sumed will hereafter be removed and they will 
suffer the doom of those hypocrites who, under 
a fair exterior, are opposed to every good cause 
and are in harmony only with Satan’s designs. 

Vers. 16-20. I say again let no man 
think me foolish, but if it cannot be so, 
yet as a foolish man receive me that I 
may boast myself a little (ver 16).—The 
Apostle here commences a more extended 
comparison with his opponents. In the first 


184 





place he demands that they would not regard 
what he was saying upon this subject as foolish 
(dgpova); but in case they could not grant 
this request he entreats them to extend to his 
foolish boasting that indulgence which they had 
learned so willingly to yield to the more extrava- 
gant demands his opponents had made upon it. 
The πάλιν (again) in connection with what im- 
mediately follows, awakens some surprise, and 
hence some have been disposed to refer it en- 
tirely to his request to be received as a fool (ὡς 
ἄφρονα δέξασϑε), comp. ver. 1. But there is no 
necessity for passing over such an interval, inas- 
much as the word has reference to both these 
expressions. It must have been evident from 
the whole tenor of his discourse that he had 
spoken in yer. 1 quite ironically of his ἀφροσύνη, 
and of course that he really did not regard his 
boasting as a folly.—[Ei μη signifies by an ellipse 
of ἐστι: if it be not; and thence by the addition 
of de it takes a force adversative to the preceding 
context: ‘butif otherwise’ (JEL 3 860, 5.c.). The 
μή indicates that the whole is in the mind, μῇ τις 
implying a wish, and a will, and εἰ μή an opposi- 
tion inthe mind alone]. Ei δὲ μήγε (Matth. vi. 
1) even in the classic writers sometimes follows 
a negative proposition, where it is intended that a 
positive wish is not to be gratified. The idea here 
is: I desire that no one should think me a fool, 
but if this wish is not complied with, then, edc. 
The ye makes the negation more striking and is 
equivalent to, even if not, truly if not. Kav (also 
in Mark vi. 56; Acts v. 15) is an elliptical mode 
of expression, equivalent to, receive me, even 
though you receive me asa fool; provided you 
extend to me the forbearance usually allowed to 
a fool. In δέξοασϑέ he refers back to ἀνέχεσϑαι 
in ver. 1, as if he would say, receive me, give me 
a hearing; and his object is to obtain from them 
what is needful for that which he immediately 
afterwards declares that he intended to do, viz., 
that I also may boast myself a little. The phrase 
1 also (κἀγὼ) has reference to the boasting of his 
opponents, comp. ver. 12 and 18.—But under a 
clear conviction of what became an Apostle of 
Christ, he wished them to understand that this 
boasting in which he put himself on a level with 
his opponents, was not a style of address to 
which he had been led by the Lord (Christ) or 
by the Divine Spirit. It was not a way con- 
formed to our Lord’s pattern, in His spirit 
(Matth. xi. 89; Luke xvii. 10), or as His servant 
might be expected to do, but it was an expression 
of Paul’s own feelings as a man.— What I am 
speaking, I am speaking not after the 
Lord, but as if in foolishness (ver. 17).—In 
ὃ λαλῶ he has in mind; in this confidence of boast- 
ing; what he had already arranged in thought, 
and what he had already begun to express in 
some introductory words. [Stanley draws atten- 
tion to Paul’s use of ὁ λάλῶ, ‘my language,’ ‘my 
general strain,’ in distinction from 6 φημί or λέγω 
‘my words.’ In classical usage λαλῶ appears to 
have had the sense of a continuous flow of talk, 
comp. Lat., dallo., Germ., lallen, and Eng. lull. 
Eupot. Dem. 8: λαλεῖν ἄριστος ἀδυνατώτατος λέγειν. 
Prur. 2. 909 A.: λαλοῦσι μὲν οὗτοι. φράζονσι δὲ ob. 
The word is in the future present because the 
Apostle was already thrown forward into the 
discussion (Osiander)]. With respect to κατὰ 











THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


---- -ἰἈ 


κύριον comp. κατὰ in chap. vil. 9; Rom. xy. 5, 
and analogous expressions in 1 Cor. vii. 10, 26, 
40; comp. Bengel, Meyer, Osiander.*—Q'¢ ἐν 
ἀφροσύνη, as it in folly, as one who is in a foolish 
state of mind.—The concluding words; in this 
confidence of boasting. (ἐν ταύτη τῇ ὑποστάσει 
τῆς Kavyyoews),—must be joined with the λαλῶ 
which must be supplied to ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐν ἀφροσύνῃ, but 
I speak as if in folly, in the confidence of boasting. 
Meyer connects them with ov κατὰ---ἀφροούνη, I 
speak this not according to the Lord but as a fool 
with this confidence, εἰς. Such a construction 
seems rather constrained and harsh. Ὑπόστασις, 
has here the same meaning as in chap. ix. 4, @. 6. 
confidence, not matter, object (in this matter, efe.,). 
still less circumstance (since we have come to 
boasting). [Sranuey: ‘The whole phrase” re- 
fers to the boasting not of himself but of his 
opponents, or at least of himself and his oppo- 
nents conjointly; and it is intended to limit the 
justification of his boasting to this particular 
occasion].—Inasmuch as many boast after 
the flesh I will boast also (ver. 18).—He here 
more fully develops what he meant by the κἀγὼ 
of ver. 16, and puts himself in direct contrast 
with his opponents, whose boasting according to 
the flesh he implies had led him to these self- 
laudations. According to the jlesh, is in contrast 
with according to the Lord (κατὰ κύριον) in ver. 17, 
and corresponds with as if in foolishness (ὡς ἐν 
ἀφροσύνη). It designates here either (1) the ob- 
ject of these self-commendations (external ad- 
vantages) such as are in other places (esp. Phil. 
iii. 8, ele.,) declared to be ἐν σαρκί; or (2) the ob- 
jective rule according to which one judges; or 
finally (8) the subjective turn or determination of 
the mind under the influence of such sensual and 
selfish motives as pride, vanity, efc. Our ex- 
planation of the phrase will depend upon 
the answer to the question whether in the 
succeeding clause the Apostle carried forward 
the same idea, as seems to be intimated by the 
κἀγὼ and by the connection with vers. 17 and 19. 





[# As the phrase κατὰ κύριον in our passage has been 
generally brought into discussions respecting the Apostle’s 
inspiration, we should carefully notice its meaning. Lite- 
rally it signifies, ‘‘ according to the Lord.” Of course, here 
as every where else in Paul’s own writing, the Lord means 
the Lord Jesus. But was it, (1) according to the example of 
the Lord who was lowly and never boasted; or (2) according 
to the Lord’s command or direction (for sometimes; as in 1 
Cor. vii. 6, 1U, 12, Paul refused to lay a Divine command on 
his brethren and only gave them human advice which they 
were at liberty to follow or decline); or (3) according to the 
Lord’s inspiring Spirit? Evidently it Was not the last, for 
Paul claimed alwa\s to be under the Spirit’s influence, and 
the preposition would not have been κατά with an accus., 
but ἐν, ἐκ or ἀπό (Winer 2 51. 5. k. 8). The analogy of 1 Cor, 
vii. 6ff., would favor the second method, In this case it 
would be no denial of his general θεοπνευστία, but rather an 
assertion of it; for his present exception would prove the 
general rule. Indeed we are under no necessity of supposing 
an exception in this particular instance, for even the in- 
spiring Spirit might direct Paul to leave men unfettered by 
authority in matters of social expediency as in marrying or 
boasting. But the contrast implied by ἀλλὰ between the 
matter here spoken of in ἀφροσύνη and κατὰ τὴν σάρκα, shows 
almost conclusively that the Apostle was here speaking or 
something κατὰ κύριον which was not according to a boust- 
ful manner. So Chrysostom; who thinks that Paul here con- 
demns boasting in form and in general as not after the Lord, 
and yet goes on to boast because the good intention which 
led him to do so made it right in the present case. We are 
led therefore by the preposition here used and the connec- 
tion to adopt the first method of interpretation mentioned 
above. Comp. Hodge, Stanley, and especially Lee on Inspk 
ration, Lec. VI. pp. 297-8. 





CHAP. XI. 1-33. 


185 





The third method, however, seems unsuitable, if 
we are obliged to conclude that the Apostle was 
determined by sinful and selfish motives. The 
best way is probably to unite the third and the 
first in such a way that the self-commendation 
intended was one which sprung from his higher 
spiritual nature, and yet took the direction of 
the flesh, because it was concerned with such 
external advantages, as genealogical descent 
(ver. 22), and individual position (ver. 23). 
Paul had done and experienced many things 
which might incline him to speak of such things 
(vers. 24, etc.). Such carnal boastings are here 
represented, though perhaps in an ironical man- 
ner, and confessed to be, on the part. of the 
Apostle, foolishness (ἀφροσύνη). [As κατὰ τ. 
σάρκα (the article much strengthens the expression 
and makes it mean according, to their flesh) can- 
not be made to signify, in carnal things, and as 
it can be made to mean nothing but, according to 
unsanctified human nature (as opposed to kara 
κύριον of the preceding verse), we see not how we 
can adopt any interpretation which makes Paul 
declare his determination, καυχᾶσϑαι κ. τ. σάρκα. 
It would not be possible to make it consistent 
with Paul’s character or a Christian spirit. Nor 
does the language strictly require it. Hopce: 
“There is no necessity of supplying κατὰ σάρκα 
after the last clause. What Paul says is, ‘As 
many boast from unworthy motives, I also will 
boast.’ If they did it from bad motives (xara 
σάρκα), he might well do it from good ones’’]. 
—For ye who are wise suffer fools 
with pleasure (ver. 20), He here tells 
them what it was that strengthened or at least 
encouraged him in this purpose. It was their 
toleration of such persons, and, in fact, their 
pleasure in fools. [People usually tolerate the 
chatter of fools, as they do the petulance of chil- 
dren]. The reason forsthis he assigns in a sud- 
den turn of his discourse, ironically reminding 
them that they must be wise men (comp. 1 Cor. 
iv. 10). Ὄντες is not here by way of concession, 
in order that the force of the reproach might be 
increased and their guilt aggravated; but its ob- 
ject isto suggest the reason for their indulgence, 
though in a way to inflict a severe reproof in 
connection with the irony. As intelligent people 
can have no pleasure in the vaunting talk of 
fools, they should not by their indulgence encou- 
rage others in their folly.—For ye suffer it, if 
one brings you into bondage, if one 
devours you, if one enslaves you, if 
one exalts himself, if one smites youin 
the face (ver. 20). He here illustrates further 
what he had said by reminding them of the 
extraordinary degree to which they had car- 
ried their indulgence, when they had taken 
pleasure in even the most unworthy treatment, 
yea, abuse of themselves (how much more, there- 
fore, might he expect them to endure his adpo- 
obvn?). In the first place, he recalls to their re- 
collection the complete subversion of their free- 
dom under the arrogant exercise of power which 
these false Apostles had put forth among them 
(ei τις καταδουλοῖ). In this we must understand 
not so much the imposition of the yoke of the law 
and the loss of evangelical freedom, as a tyranni- 
cal assertion of authority, a sacerdotal guardian- 
ship of their consciences, and a requirement of 


a blind obedience. In the next place, he reminds 
them of the selfish, avaricious practices to which 
they had submitted: εἰ τίς κατεσϑίει, if a man 
consumes you, and wrests from you all you have, 
comp. Ps. liii. 5; Matth. xxiii. 13. The word 
has the sense of devorare (not, to destroy by grief, 
nor, to disturb the Church by breaking it up into 
parties). There is no necessity of introducing 
here the idea of an inordinate fondness for luxu- 
rious food and good living, in order to distinguish 
κατεσϑίει from λαμβάνει, for this latter word 
means not simply to take (as when one receives. 
a present or reward, or secretly conveys some- 
thing away; for this would require something 
like ὑμῖν after it, and as a feebler expression. 
would not be needed after the preceding verb), 
but to catch, as in chap. xii. 16, by craft, by sly 
contrivances to get one in his power (as in hunt- 
ing), by such means as would readily be supplied! 
by ambition or avarice, [Hopce: “ Our version, 
by supplying: of you, alters the sense and makes 
this clause express less than the preceding; de- 
vouring is a stronger expression for rapacity 
than taking of you. As after κατεσϑίει in the 
preceding clause, ὑμᾶς must be supplied after 
λαμβάνει: ‘if any take you,’ i. e., capture you or 
ensnare you’’]. Hecloses this account by men- 
tioning some insolent (ἐπαίρεται) and disgracefal 
treatment they had received. Whether by 
ἐπαίρεται (Sc. ὑμῖν) we are to understand the as- 
sertion of some advantage which these Jews pre- 
tended to have over the Gentile Christians (Osi-. 
ander), must be considered uncertain. Εἰς" 
πρόσωπον δέρειν indicates that their rule over the: 
Church was characterized by violence, intimida-. 
tion, and even insolence. [The ancient inter- 
preters agree that this expression refers not toa 
literal blow with the fist, but only to those: 
abusive reproaches which one heaps upon an- 
other to his face (Jerome: ‘Si quis etiam presentes- 
objurgat’’). The immediately following words 
were supposed to call for this modification of 
meaning (Theodoret). The highest possible in- 
solence is implied; for in Oriental countries: 
such a blow was intended for the utmost con- 
tempt (1 Kings xxii. 24; Matth. v.39; Acts xxiii, 
2). Stanley suggests that ecclesiastical rulers: 
must sometimes have resorted even to corporeal 
buffetting, since even the Apostle found it need- 
ful to forbid such a thing (1 Tim. iii. 8; Tit. i. 7), 
and the Council of Braga (A. D. 675) orders: 
‘that no bishop at his will and pleasure shall 
strike his clergy.” Worpsworrtu: perhaps fana- 
tically, with a pretence of Divine enthusiasm 
and prophetic zeal, comp. 1 Kings xxii. 24; Neh. 
xiii. 25; Isa. lviii. 4]. Ewaup: ‘e.g., by the 
reproach, as among the Galatians, that those who 
had been converted and instructed by Paul were 
not, in fact, Christians.’ 

Vers. 21-27. I say it with shame, that. 
we have been weak. (ver. 21 a)—The Apostle 
here passes on to his commendation of himself;. 
and he here compares his own preéminent en- 
dowments and sufferings with the pretentions of 
the boastful false apostles. He first draws at- 
tention to the fact that when he was in Corinth 
he had been weak in comparison with these pow- 
erful men (comp. 1 Cor. ii. 2). This is said in 
words of forcible irony (κατὰ ἀτιμίαν λέγω) : 1 con- 
fess it with shame, for if it were true, it must be 


οὐ δον ΠΥ ΝΝ κυ νου εκ νιν mile Me ican Ὁ Ὁ 


a deep dishonor, and much disgraces me (κατὰ 
with an abstract noun, I say it with shame, 7. 6.» 
as though it were a circumlocution for an ad- 
verb). [WineR, Gram. 2 58, Wesster, p. 169]. 

In strong contrast with this ironical concession 
respecting his earlier weakness, we have imme- 
diately after it an assertion of his right to be as 
bold as any one in his claims. By means of the 
ὡς before ὅτε he implies that what he had just 
conceded as a shameful thing, was a circum- 
stance Saran of only in the mind as in 2 
Thess. 2 (Meyer). In the sentence λέγω--- 
ἡμεῖς τὸ pal the same change of persons as in 
ver. 6, Osiander: he puts himself and his com- 
panions in direct contrast with their whole com- 
pany. In this way we obtain a good and con- 
sistent meaning in accordance with the signifi- 
cation of the words and the connection. This, 
however, would not be the case if we regarded xara 
ατιμίαν λέγω as referring to the preceding verse: 
I say this to your shame (because ye are pleased 
with such things); or I say this with reference 
to the disgraceful manner in which you have 
been treated, for both of these remarks would 
be entirely foreign to his discourse. We may 
add that on this construction not only would the 
ironical character of the whole passage be inter- 
rupted, but the words ought to have been: κατὰ 
τὴν ἀτιμίαν ὑμῶν. Without some such more par- 
ticular definition, it would be most naturally re- 
ferred to the subject of λέγω and of ἠσϑενήσαμεν, 
especially as the latter verb includes within 
itself the notion of an driuia. Moreover there 
would be a harshness in taking ὡς ὅτε in the sense 
of dcavei, as if we had been weak. The indefinite- 
ness of the phrase κατὰ ἀτιμίαν is opposed to an ex- 
planation of the words, which should make them 
signify: To your shame I say that we were not 
as strong as they were, and that we never at- 
tained as much respect among you; and also 
to that advocated by Riickert: on this point, in- 
deed, I must concede to your disgrace, that I 
was weak.—But in whatsoever respect any 
one is bold (I speak it foolishly) I am 
boldalso (ver. 214) —He here begins his boast- 
ing in the proper sense. The idea is: I confess 
it with shame, that I have been weak in com- 
parison with them, but now when the occasion 
calls for boldness (boasting), I put myself on ἃ 
level with any of them in every respect. Τολμᾷν 
occurs in chap. x. 2, and πεποιϑέναι in Phil. iii. 

3.— Ep ἀφροσύνῃ λέγω is an ironical concession 
(Meyer) to what he knew would be the judgment 
of his opponents respecting these claims (comp. 

μὴ τις, elc., in ver. 16), or (Osiander) an expres- 
sion of his feeling of humiliation on account of 
this self-commendation, with an implied reproach 
of his opponents for compelling him thus to 
speak. The first point on which he would match 
his opponents in this self-commendation, is 
brought forward in ver. 22, and had reference 
to genealogical descent.— Are they He- 
brews? soam 1. Are they Israelites? 
ΒΟΘ 1, Are they the seed of Abraham? 
so am I.—This was a matter of especial boast 
with those Judaizing teachers, in whose eyes 
Christianity was nothing but a continued Juda- 
ism, which should give to the Jewish people a 
decided preference above all nations, comp. Phil. 

iii. 5. The three following sentences should 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


probably be read, in wT sseip σά τ ον id” bie Qingeuscs nde με μοι msec ae with the ardent 
feelings of the Apostle at this time, interroga- 
tively, and we may notice in them an ascending 
climax. The first honorable appellation, ‘EGpaio, 
may be looked upon as the designation by which 
foreign nations usually distinguished the ancient 
and venerable nationality which derived its name 
either from Eber, Abraham’s ancestor (Gen. xi. 
16), or from its migration from the other side of 
the Euphrates.* Some, however, have con- 
tended that this name designated a Palesti- 
nian in distinction from a Hellenistic Jew; and 
they explain the κἀγώ by attempting to show that 
Paul was born at Giscala in Galilee (according 
to Jerome, but in opposition to Acts xxii. 3) or 
by supposing that his parents resided there be- 
fore his birth, or that they remoyed to Jerusa- 
lem at an early period, and gave him there a 
purely Hebrew education. The first explana- 
tion is certainly to be preferred, since even if the 
facts on which the opinion is based were com- 
pletely proved, the Apostle would hardly say of 
himself, without any further explanation, that 
he was no Hellenist, but a Hebrew, and hence a 
Jew of the purest stamp. The second appella- 
tion, ᾿Ισραηλίται, designates a higher position, 
inasmuch as it indicates a participation in the 
honor of the sacred and important name of 
Israel, or a membership of the theocratic nation. 
Finally, σπέρμα ’AGpadu designates the bighest 
external distinction, inasmuch as it signifies a 
participation in the exalted promises given 
to that ancestor.—Are they ministers of 
Christ? (I speak as one beside himself) 
I am more (ver. 23 a).—The second point on 
which his opponents prided themselves, was, 
that they were ministers of Christ. To the 
question whether they were such ministers, he 
does not return a directly negative answer, but 
he declares that on this important matter he was 
superior to them, and he proceeds to produce a 
catalogue of sufferings and conflicts, in the en- 
durance of which he was far in advance of them. 
The words παραφρονῶν λαλῶ (I speak as one quite 
beside himself), which are placed before ὑπὲρ 
ἐγώ, are much stronger than those he had used 
in ver. 21, and yet they are of a similar import. 
They may be supposed to express an opinion 
which he anticipated his opponents would form 
respecting what he was saying (Meyer), or 
{more probably, Alford] as the protest which 
his own humble consciousness of unworthiness 
urged him to make against these high self-com- 
mendations (Osiander). Inthe latter case the 
reference is, not to what he had just said, as if 
it were a sign of madness to call such people by 
the name of Christ’s ministers (Rickert), but 
to the words, I am more (ὑπὲρ ἐγώ), and the 


[{* Robinson’s Heb. Lex., Kitto’s Encyc., and Smith’s Dict. 
of the Bible. Art. Hebrew. The name DY i is now gene- 


rally regarded not as a Patronymic, but as an appellative 
noun from VAY, one from the other side (Gen. xiv. 18 


Sept., meparns—transitor). It seems to have been Radha 
a Cis-Euphratian word applied to Trans-Euphratian imm 

grants, bus afterwards used by the Israelites themselves as 
the name best known to foreigners. There is no evidence 
that the Israelites attached any special value to their de- 
scent from Eber, which, indeed, they shared with a number — 
of Oriental nations (Gen. x: 21, probably means simply: 

“the Father of the natiuns beyond the river.’’)] 


CHAP. XI. 1-33. 


187 


—_—_————e Oe -ο-ο-----------------------------------.-..-------------- ΔΨ 


further development of the idea which he was 
about to make, and in which he felt that 
there was a more than common boasting. 
The ὑπὲρ may refer to the idea contained in 
διάκονοι Χριστοῦ, as if he would have said, ‘I am 
more than that; if they are such servants, I am 
more.’ This would be a withdrawal of the ap- 
pareat concession that they were such servants, 
and would be inconsistent with what he had said 
in vy. 13-15, (Meyer). The words may also be 
referred to his opponents, and be made equiva- 
lent to ὑπὲρ αὐτοὺς: I am such a minister in a 
higher degree than they are. The latter seems 
the simpler construction, and more correspon- 
dent with the particulars afterwards mentioned 
and the spirit (not ironical) which pervades the 
passage. We must also remember that he had 
not intended to decide whether they were in fact 
servants of Christ, and the sense would therefore 
seem to be: granted that they are such servants, 
I am more, etc. (ὑπέρ is used as an adverb only 
here). And yet he proceeds to mention (in ver. 
23 5) as the reason for his preéminence, no illus- 
trious achievements or wonderful results he had 
accomplished, but difficulties, troubles, conflicts, 
perils—By labors more abundant, by 
stripes above measure, by imprisonments 
more abundant, by deaths frequently.— 
The word év introduces us to the state in which 
he actually was, and in consequence of which he 
should be reckoned a servant of Christin a much 
more eminent sense than they. The adverbs, 
περισσοτέρως, etc., should be construed as adjec- 
tives belonging to the nouns with which they are 
connected, though they are placed after those 
nouns (comp. Phil. i. 26; Gal. 1. 18). In opposi- 
tion to the construction which explains them as 
adverbs [qualifying ὑπὲρ ἐγὼ εἰμι, which is to be 
understood before each member of the sentence], 
we have πολλάκ'ς. before which we could not con- 
tinue to underst:n!the phrase. Iam more than 
they a servant ot Cir'st. Even if we might sup- 
ply there some such phrase as: “1 have been, 
or I have experienced the fortune of, a servant 
of Christ;”’ or I have been fotnd by actual ex- 
perience to be one, the relation of the several 
expressions to ὑπὲρ ἐγώ would be destroyed, and 
yet would be required again in ver. 26. Kéra are 
the labors he had performed as an Apostle, while 
preaching the Gospel, saving souls and contend- 
ing for the truth (comp. Acts xx. 19-20, 31). In 
such labors he well knew that he had far sur- 
passed his opponents, even though he might con- 
cede that they were not deficient in an active 
zeal from impure motives. It was not perhaps 
easy to say anything of thestripes and imprison- 
ments they had suffered, unless possibly their 
fanatical proceedings had involved them at some 
time in such sufferings. ὝὙπερβαλλόντως, more 
exceeding, an interruption of the use of the com- 
parative, as in the next clause by πολλάκις. 
Φυλακαῖς, Clemens Rom. in his first Ep. ad. Cor. 
chap. v. says that Paulsuffered bonds seven times. 
By ϑανάτοις is signified every kind of peril of 
death. Comp. chap. iv. 11, and 1 Cor. xv. 31. 
To show in what way he had experienced these 
stripes and deadly perils, he here introduces a 
parenthetical passage (vv. 24-25).—Of the 
Jews five times I received forty stripes, 
save one.—In the first place he mentions the 


abuse he had endured from his own countrymen, 
the Jews. Πεντάκις---ἔλαβον. These five times 
were the repetitions of this kind of punishment at 
different times. This must have been the scourg- 
ing which was inflicted for minor offences in the 
synagogues, and which was never to exceed 
forty stripes (Deut. xx. 3). [The manner in 
which this punishment was inflicted is thus de- 
scribed in the Mishna: The hands of the criminal 
are bound to a post, his clothes are then re- 
moved till at least his breast and shoulders are 
bare. With a scourge made of leather in four 
strands he is then scourged in a stooping pos- 
ture, one-third of the stripes on his breast, an- 
other third on the right shoulder, and another 
third on the left shoulder (CrarKe). Paul 
doubtless remembered, under these inflictions, 
how he had subjected Christians to the same 
treatment when he was himself a persecutor. 
Acts xxii. 19]. The probability is (though others 
explain the reason otherwise) that the number 
of these blows was limited to thirty-nine, lest by 
any wrong numbering the precept should be vio- 
lated. Παρά designates an approximation to- 
ward an extreme point; until to, until upon 
(Passow, παρά iii. 1. 6.) This whipping was so 
terrible that many died under its infliction, and 
it is therefore numbered among the ϑανάτοις..--- 
Thrice was I beaten with rods.— Epfaf- 
δίσϑην signifies, a Roman kind of punishment by 
scourging with rods (slender staves), Acts xvi. 22. 
But although in the previous case he had desig- 
nated the authors of his punishment by the phrase 
ὑπὸ ᾿Ιουδαίων and had placed this designation by 
way of emphasis at the commencement of the 
sentence as if it were especially grievous to him 
(perhaps also as peculiarly disgraceful to his 
Judaizing countrymen), he here says nothing 
expressly of the persons by whom the punish- 
ment was inflicted. Indeed no specification was 
necessary.—Once was I stoned; thrice I 
sufferedshipwreck; anightandaday have 
I spent in the deep. (ver. 25).—On ἐλεϑάσϑην 
consult Acts xiv. 19.—With respect to the three 
shipwrecks nothing is said in the Acts (that 
mentioned in Acts xxvii, was at a later period). 
—The νυχϑήμερον (24 hours) ἐν τῷ βυϑῷ πεποίηκα 
must have been the consequence of some ship- 
wreck. Not that he had been preserved that 
length of time in some wonderful manner under 
the water, but that he had been driven about 
upon some board or piece of timber or wreck in 
the midst of the sea, and probably been over- 
whelmed by the waves. Βυϑός here signifies, 
not a pit or a deep prison, but the depth of the 
sea, as in Ps. evii. 24, οἱ. al.—Ilovévv here signi- 
fies to pass away time, as in Acts xv. 89 et. al. 
The perfect indicates a lively representation of 
the past in the mind of the writer [Winer, @ 41, 
4, p. 214].—In vv. 26, 27 he resumes his proof 
that he was a servant of Christ in a higher sense 
than his opponents, and mentions first his fre- 
quent journeys and the manifold dangers through 
which they led him, and then the hardships and 
privations of all kinds he had been obliged to 
encounter.—By journeyings often, by per- 
ils of rivers, by perils of robbers, (ver. 26). 
- Ἔν is not to be supplied in these several 
clauses, for the dat. instrum. is here made use of. 
[Hovex: ‘Our translators have throughout thie 


188 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





passage supplied the preposition in. But as ἐν 
in the preceding verse is used instrumentally, so 
here we have the instrumental dative, by jour- 
neyings, by perils, etc. It was by voluntarily 
exposing himself to these dangers, and by the 
endurance of these sufferings that the Apostle 
proved his superior claim to be regarded as a 
devoted minister of Christ.” ] After the paren- 
thesis of vv. 24, 25, there is a return to the 
former construction (ver. 23). Rivers (ποταμῶν) 
perils which proceeded from streams of various 
kinds (according to the classical usage of lan- 
guage). He had in his mind those inundations 
and difficult fordings, ete., [common, especially 
on the road frequently travelled by Paul, be- 
tween Jerusalem and Antioch, comp. Alford].— 
Robbers (ληστῶν) were very common in those 
regions which were the scene of most of his 
journeys.—By perils from my own country- 
men by perils from the heathen. (ver. 26 δ). 
—The words ἐκ γένους, from the Jews who not 
only themselves laid snares for him, butat Corinth 
and in other places stirred up the Gentiles (ἐξ 
ἐϑνῶν) against him; γένους wovoccurs otherwise in 
Gal. i. 14.—He now proceeds to mention the scenes 
in which these perils had been encountered.—_By 
perils in the city, by perilsinthe wilder- 
ness, by perils in the sea, by perils among 
false brethren. (ver. 26 c).—The words ἐν πόλει 
are contrasted with ἐν ἐρήμῳ, as we sometimes say: 
city and country. He had before his eye such 
cities as Jerusalem, Damascus (vv. 82, 83) Thes- 
salonica, Philippi and Ephesus.—In desert, un- 
inhabited countries (ἐρήμῳ) he was in danger 
from robbers, from wild beasts, from losing his 
way, etc.—The words ἐν ϑαλάσση are closely con- 
nected with ἐν ἐρήμῳ, for the perils ot the sea 
were not merely those extreme cases mentioned 
in ver. 25.—He finally notices that which was 
‘the most painful of all, among false brethren, (év 
ψευδαδέλφοις, comp. Gal. ii. 4). He has refer- 
ence to those hostile Judaizers, whose fanatical 
hatred impelled them so far as to threaten the 
life of the Apostle to the Gentiles, and thus made 
it evident that the name of brethren had no pro- 
per application to them. (Others think that 
these were not really Christians, but only such 
as pretended to be, that they might more easily 
lay their hands upon him and remove him out 
of the way !).—After this enumeration of various 
kinds of peril, he now proceeds to mention first 
his hardships:—By labor and weariness, by 
frequent watchings, by hunger and thirst, 
by frequent fastings, by cold and naked- 
ness. (ver. 27).—The word μόχθῳ isan advance in 
signification upon κόπῳ. Very probably he had 
in mind here the manual labor he went through 
when he was at Corinth, and which not unlikely 
consumed some of his nights (1 Thess. ii. 9, 2 
Thess. iii. 8), and so gave occasion for watchings 
epee in immediate connection with his of- 

cial duties. —The word νηστείαις in distinction 
from λιμῷ καί δίψει must signify voluntary fast- 
ings, comp. chap. vi. 5, 1 Cor. ix. 272. On hun- 
ger, thirst, nakedness, consult 1 Cor. iv. 11.— 
We thus have before us on the one hand such 
voluntary self-denials as were required for his 
official duties that he might have time to devote 
himself more unreservedly to prayer and inter- 
cession; and on the other the want of those ab- 


solute necessities of life which could not always 
be obtained during the hasty journeys which his 
work and his safety sometimes required. The 
thirst (dpoc) also could not always be avoided in 
seasons of extreme heat in desert lands. 

Vers. 28-30. Besides the things not enu- 
merated, the business which comes upon 
me day by day the anxiety for all the 
churches.—The Apostle now turns from a par- 
ticular recital of the various perils, pains, e/c., 


which he had been obliged to endure, to those © 


more general burdens and cares which came upon 
him every day in his official duty. Τὰ παρεκτός 
signifies the things besides, ὦ. 6., those which take 
place beside (not, what are to be met with from 
without, outside of the church, or, what occurs out 
of the regular order; for both these expressions 
would be inconsistent with the usages of demon- 
strative discourse). He had reference to further 
details, in addition to those he had just given, but 
which he was about to leave unmentioned. Χωρίς 
therefore has the sense of: without, irrespective 
of.—It would seem an unnecessary harshness to 
regard the following nominatives as in irregular 
apposition with τῶν παρεκτός so that the sense 
would be: all that I have thus mentioned come 
upon me only in the regular course of things, in 
addition to, or irrespective of, that which is be- 
yond that course, viz., the daily matters of atten- 
tion, etc. The same may be said of the attempt 
to connect χωρὶς τῶν παρεκτὸς with that which 
precedes, according to which ἡ ἐπίστασις would 
be avery abrupt commencement of a new sentence. 
Nothing need be understood but éor in the sense 
of: takes place. If the reading, ἡ ἐπισύστασίς 
μου, Which has considerable authority in its 
favor, be adopted, the meaning of the words 
must be either: an insurrection, a collecting to- 
gether in troops against me (comp. Acts xxiv 
12); in which case the fact mentioned would be- 
long rather to the κινδύνοις and certainly could 
not be a daily occurrence; or the burden which 
came upon him in consequence of the perverted 
doctrines and disorderly practices of those around 
him (Bengel). The idea of a concourse, a great 
crowd of people or even of importunities every 
day, is not altogether sustained by the meaning 
of the word (even in Numb. xxvi. 9, ἐπισυστάντες 
has the hostile sense of rising in opposition to 
016).-- Ἐπίστασις which is sustained by better 
authority gives us a signification which is appro- 
priate to the context, for we may take it either 
in the sense of delay (hinderance), that which 
causes me delay every day; or in the sense of at- 
tention, having the care of something, an intense 
straining of the thoughts to determine what is to 
be done or how a thing is to be arranged. The 
latter sense seems most consistent with what fol- 
lows. If we adopt the reading μοι, sustained by 
B. F. G. [and Sin.] instead of μου, it will not be 
difficult to bring it into agreement with the éorm 
which we have supplied, in the sense of, akes 
place for me. With this also may be closely con- 
nected the immediately following sentence, the 
care of all the churches; though in that case we 
must not make that the subject of ἡ ἐπίστασις 
μον (μοι) ete. [my daily care is anxiety ete.} 
(Meyer). By all the churches are probably to 
be understood those which had been founded by 
the Apostle and his school or which had come 


CHAP. XI 1-38. 





under his influence, ¢. 6. those beyond the limits 
of Palestine. ‘he care he exercised over them, 
was for the preservation of Christian usages and 
order, in doctrine and practice.—The trouble 
which this involved, he describes (ver. 29), with 
_reference to the particular department of his pas- 
toral work (comp. Acts xx. 18, 19, 31);—Who is 
weak andI am not weak? Who is of- 
fended and I do not burn ?— Aovevei refers 
here not to physical infirmities but to moral im- 
perfections, defects of judgment and of faith, 
intellectual and moral weakness.—A climax is 
reached in cxavdadifec Pa: (1 Vor. viii. 13), which 
signifies, to be perplexed or led astray. Οὐκ 
ἀσϑενῶ does not imply that he condescended to en- 
ter into all the infirmities and prejudices of his 
brethren (like 1 Cor. ix. 22), but that he so sin- 
cerely sympathized with others, that he madetheir 
weakness his own, and to a great extent became 
one with those who were feeble. [Curysostom: 
«« He says not, ‘And I share not in his sorrow,’ but 
‘Tam thrown into the tumult and agitation which 
I should have if I were under the same trouble or 
infirmity.’”] Thisisthe reason that no ἐγώ is ex- 
pressed before ἀσϑενῶ, although it is subsequently 
used, because he feels himself not. so intimately 
connected with those who were offended (cxavda- 
λιζόμενος). [He so identified himself with those 
wko were weak, that he spoke as one with them, 
a3 though he were himself the church throughout 
the world; but when he came to speak of those 
who had been stumbled or led astray he sepa- 
rates himself from them in their wanderings, but 
is fired with indignation for their sake and speaks 
for them]. Thus Osiander; but otherwise Meyer, 
who observes that the negation in the former 
case had reference to the verb itself, ‘who ts fee- 
ble without occasioning a weakness also in me?’ 
whereas in the latter the negation had reference 
rather to the person: ‘‘who ts stumbled, and I do 
not burn?” [ile sympathized with the weak, he 
glowed with tae strong]. Πυροῦσϑαι has a diffe- 
rent meaning here from that which it had in 1 
Cor. vii. 9, for the idea here is either that he 
was violently displeased with the one who had 
misled his brother, or (more probably) that he 
was deeply and acutely pained for the brother 
who had been offended and misled. Of course it 
would have been inappropriate for him to have 
written σκανδαλίζομαι, and we should altogether 
miss the Apostle’s thought if we took πυροῦσϑαι 
in the sense it bears in 1 Cor. vii. 9 (in relation 
to incontinence). But very feeble and quite 
aside from the sense of the passage would it be 
to explain the verse so as to make it signify: 
who suffers if I do not suffer? 7. 6. I suffer more 
than any other one (this would call for an ἐγώ 
also before do¥eva).—If I must boast, I 
will boast of the things which concern 
my infirmities (ver. 30).—He here finally 
draws a conclusion from what he had been saying, 
with respect to the nature of the boasting to 
which his opponents had driven him (δεῖ); and he 
reminds his readers how unlike it was to that of 
his opponents, inasmuch as it referred entirely 
to matters connected with his infirmity, and it 
made him appear rather like a feeble man sub- 
ject to ordinary passions (sufferings and afilic- 
tions of every kind).—He was about to mention 
some additional particulars of a similar kind, as 


189 


matters of which he sale iia a eublonched Nematic etl boast (καυχήσομαι). “τς 
In ἀσϑενείας he has no allusion to ἁσϑενῶ in ver. 
29, since the word there indicated merely a feel- 
ing which identified him with others, and καυγή- 
couat shows that he had reference here to that 
which was to follow, [not exclusively, however, for 
he had already been boasting of such things, and 
was now only continuing the recital. Such fu- 
tures in a narrative or in an argument often sig- 
nify the purposed continuance of an action]. 
Vers. 31-33. — God, the Father of the 
Lord Jesus, who is blessed forever- 
more, knoweth that I lie not. — The 
affirmation here given is rendered peculiarly 
solemn by the unusually full and Christian de- 
signation it gives to God (comp. chap. i. 3) and 
the ascription of praise it contains (ov—aidvac). 
It must not be connected with the enumeration 
commenced in ver. 23, for ver. 30 stands between 
the two sections. We should rather refer it to 
the purpose which he had announced in ver. 30, 
inasmuch as it might seem incredible to many 
that he would boast of his suffering condition 
rather than of his achievements, his manifesta- 
tions of power, and the results of his actions. 
The main fact mentioned in the two next verses 
appears of too small importance to call for such 
an asseveration. It seems only a poor evasion 
of the difficulty to suggest that the fact was not 
generally known and that it could not then be 
proved without great difficulty; or that it seemed 
hardly credible that the Jews would be guilty of 
such an atrocity; or finally that his escape must 
have seemed very wonderful, and hence that the 
Apostle might feel called upon to make the as- 
sertion especially solemn. We must either con~ 
clude that he here commenced a historical ac- 
count of his personal sufferings, which was im.. 
mediately interrupted and never completed 
(Meyer), or we must connect it with chap. xii. 
7, 8, where he begins again to speak of his 
ἘΦ ΕἾ: (Osiander, who is inclined to make it 
refer to both the preceding and the following 
verses). What he mentions in vers. 32, 33, took 
place when he first commenced his work, and it 
had therefore made a deep impression upon his 
mind as his first deliverance from imminent 
danger. It does not seem likely that this cir- 
cumstance is mentioned merely to authenticate 
what he had said in vers. 23, efc., because it came 
first in the order of his deliverances, nor as a 
supplementary account of a persecution which 
had come upon him out of the ordinary course of 
what he had been recounting, and separated, far 
back in the very commencement of his course. 
According to Osiander, this incident was men- 
tioned with so much prominence because in time 
and character it was closely connected with 
chap. xii. 2. Ewald suggests that there can be 
no doubt that Paul throughout this whole pic- 
ture had his eye especially upon those calamities 
and afflictions which had their origin in the ha. 
tred of those Jews and Jewish Christians from 
among whom his Corinthian opponents had 
arisen, and that this will explain why he could 
not refrain from heightening the colors of that 
picture by this account of a special danger into 
which that deadly hatred had brought him soon 
after his conversion.—In Damascus, the go- 
vernor under Aretas the king guarded 


190 





the city of the Damascenes that he might 
apprehend me (ver. 32). We have here 
either a pleonasm or an anacoluthon. Perhaps 
he had intended at first to write ἐφρούρει τὰς 
πύλας (comp. Acts ix. 24), and afterwards did not 
notice that he had already written ἐν Δαμασκῷ. 
[Barnes: ‘Our translation implies that there 
was a body of men stationed (a garrison), in or- 
der to guard the city. The true idea is that 
there were men (perhaps a guard of hostile Jews 
gathered for this purpose only) to keep watch of 
the gates, lest he should escape them.” The 
word ἐφρούρει signifies to sentinel, to keep guard 
over. Wordsworth thinks that the phrase ‘the 
city of the Damascenes”’ implies that the city 
was not altogether subject to Aretas, but had 
some independent jurisdiction left at the same 
time that Aretas had an Ethnarch there. It 
may have been nominally free, but under the 
protection of a superior power.” AstheJewsin 
some cities had a special ruler under the title of 
Ethnarch, it has been suggested by some that 
this governor was in a special sense over them]. 
The Lthnarch (ἐϑνάρ χης) was the same as a pre- 
fect or governor, though this precise title was 
used but little, and only in the Septuagint and 
among the Byzantines. Aretas was a king of 
Arabia Petrzea, and the father-in-law of Herod 
Antipas. After the death of Tiberias, he must 
have taken advantage of the circumstances of the 
moment for gaining power in the city of Damas- 
cus. The incident here related took place during 
the period of this brief ascendancy there. What 
is here ascribed to the governor is in Acts ix. 24 
ascribed to the Jews; but this apparent discre- 
pancy is explained by the supposition that the 
governor acted under the instigation and possi- 
bly through the instrumentality of the numerous 
and influential Jews who are known to have re- 
sided there. Comp. Meyer, Osiander, Winer, 
Zeller (Aretas). On ver. 33 comp. Acts ix. 25.— 
And through a window I was let down 
in a basket through the wall, and escaped 
his hands. (ver. 33).—The word ϑυρίς [is a di- 
minutive form of ipa], and signifies, probably, a 
small opening overhead in the wall of the city, 
perhaps in the house of some Christian. [He- 
sychius tells us that capydvy was defined by some 
to be a rope twisted of rushes; by others, any 
thing woven together of rushes; but Suidas 
makes it the same thing as σπυρίς in Acts ix. 25, 
1. ¢., a basket. From this incident Paul was ri- 
diculed by infidels of a later period, as ὁ ἀπόστο- 
Aog σαργανοφόρητος. He was, however, so far 
from being ashamed of it, that he gloried in it. 
In Acts and in our passage the phrase is διὰ τοῦ 
τείχους, which our English A. V. translates ‘by 
the wall,” but which should probably be, 
‘*through the wall,” as more consistent with the 
radical meaning of the preposition. As the 
aperture, however, was probably from some such 
building as is even now seen overhanging the 
walls of Damascus (see a representation of such 
a house in Conybeare and Howson, Vol. 1, p. 
100), either expression may be consistent with 
the actual fact. Smith’s Dict. Art. Window; 
also Stanley. Comp. Josh. ii. 15, and 1 Sam. 
xix. 12. On the chronological relations of this 
incident see Alford on Acts ix, 25]. 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


eee 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


A minister of Christ should meet the spirit of 
sect and of faction with all the resistance of 
which he is capable. For by that spirit Satan 
often succeeds in drawing the Church away from 
her Bridegroom, and in causing her to prove un- 
faithful. Gradually he brings her under the 
tyranny of men, who assume to be ministers of 
Christ while they are in truth the servants of 
Satan, arrogate to themselves every kind of 
power, and by every art and outrage enslave the 
souls of men. Their object is by such means to 
make God’s people dependent entirely upon them, 
and to get complete possession of all persons and 
property in the Church, under the pretence that 
‘it is needful for the good cause and for the 
salvation of souls.” A hierarchy which has 
usurped the name of the Catholic Church, or 
any other name which promised to serve its cor- 


rupt purpose, whether of prophets, messengers 


of Christ, men of the Spirit or restorers of the 
true Church, has been practising such arts in 
every age, but always openly or covertly depre- 
ciating the system of faith and order which the 
true Prophets and Apostles once established, and 
now, as the great apostasy draws near, threaten- 
ing to become more insolent. Every true ser- 
vant of Christ is sacredly bound, for his Master’s 
sake, to contend against such practices by every 
means within his reach, that the purity of the 
Church may be secured or maintained, that her 
dependence upon her only Head may be sincere, 
and that her devotion to Christ may be unre- 
served and pure. While he freely rebukes wick- 
edness and calls it by its true names, he must 
denounce with severity, and, if advisable, with 
gentle or keen irony, the weaknesses and follies 
of those who have allowed themselves to be led 
astray. In extreme cases he must cheerfully 
endure for the cause of his Lord all those sacri- 
fices, self-denials, sufferings and conflicts which 
that Lord Himself endured. Though he thus 
humbles himself in the presence of a meek and 
lowly Master, and feels that he can never do too 
much, he should not hesitate to make use of what 
he has done and suffered to confound those who 
assume the credit of what others have done, or by 
fancied or pretended merits seek to obtain influ- 
ence atthe expense of more deserving persons. In 
such circumstances he must bring to notice things 
which he would rather have concealed, and 
make his own virtues the means of saving those 
who have been wickedly seduced from the way 
of truth. In this way the esteem in which 
Christ’s ministers are held may be used to pre- 
serve these weaker brethren from becoming the 
slaves of Satan’s ministers. 

i Our Lord’s relation to the Church is not 
only most endearing, but most permanent and 
secure. Whatever his relations to angels and 
other beings may be, his connection with his 
church is like that of a monarch with his queen. 
Until her number and her graces are completed, 
she remains only espoused and in a state of pre- 
paration. God’s ministers are now, as it were, 
filling His place, as His ambassadors, proxies, 
or paranymphs (Isa. lxii. 4. δ), but it is only te 


mn 
hs 


CHAP. XI. 1-33. 





bring her into a true conjugal relation to him 
(comp. a sermon of Pres. Edwards on ‘The 
Church’s Marriage ;’’ Works, vol. vi. p. 192). But 
when this preparation is completed, ‘Christ 
will invite His Spouse to enter with Him into 
the palace of His glory, prepared for her from 
the foundation of the world, and will lead her in 
with Him; and this glorious Bridegroom and 
Bride shall ascend together, with all their shin- 
ing ornaments, into the heaven of heavens, the 
whole multitude of angels waiting upon them: 
and this Son and daughter of God shall, in their 
united glory and joy, present themselves together 
before the Father; and they both shall, in that re- 
lation and union together, receive the Father’s 
blessing: and shall thenceforward rejoice to- 
gether in consummate, uninterrupted, immutable 
and everlasting glory, in the love and embraces 
of each other, and joint enjoyment of the love of 
the Father.”” Epwarps: vol. VI: p. 205. 

8. “Our religion has cost much suffering. 
We have here a detail of extraordinary trials 
and sorrows in establishing it. It has always 
advanced, amidst sufferings, persecutions and 
martyrdoms. How many such men as Brainard 
and Martyn have sacrificed their lives to extend 
it round the world. All that we enjoy is the 
fruit of such toils and sacrifices, and we have 
not one Christian privilege which has not cost 
the life of many a martyr.” 

4. «We may infer the sincerity of such men 
and the truth of the cause in which they are en- 
gaged. They had nothing to gain by such suf- 
ferings, if they did not believe the facts on which 
their religion was founded. And as they could 
not be mistaken with respect to such palpable 
facts, their religion must be true.” Barnes, 
abridged]. 


\ 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Srarke:—Ver. 1 Hepincer:—The commen- 
dation of ourselves solely for the honor of God, 
to confound blasphemers or to defend truth and 
innocence, is in fact wisdom, although envious 
and uninformed persons may not so regard it or 
so represent it. When we see one boast of his 
person and of his merits from a spirit of pride, 
covetousness, or selfishness, and another only of 
his office, of the grace which has been shown to 
an unworthy sinner, or of what he has done en- 
tirely through grace, we cannot but see that the 
latter is a very different act from the former; 
for Satan has obtained no small advantage when 
he has deprived a Christian of his credit.—Hep- 
incER:—Never be grieved, if your doings and 
your zeal are evil spoken of. Know you not 
that most men carry a pope within themselves, 
t. e., wilfulness, prejudice, passions? What hope 
can there be before such judges? Pray ear- 
nestly that God would rule in your heart, and 
keep you from all corrupt affections and views, 
and then go forward (1 Thess. ii. 4).—Ver. 2. 
As the high-priest under the Old Testament was 
forbidden to marry any one but a chaste virgin 
(Levit. xxi. 13), so Jesus will have only those 
who are pure and who will not play the harlot 
with the world (chap. vii. 1; 1 Pet. i. 22; Eph. 
v. 26-27). True ministers are Christ’s para- 
nymphs, to bring men to Christ, and to confirm 








191 





them in spiritual wedlock.—Ver. 8. When we 
see men turn away from God’s Word, wrest it 
from its true meaning, or disbelieve its promises 
or its threatenings, we may be sure that Satan 
is at work among them, and corrupting them 
(Luke viii. 12).—Ver. 4. Wo to such as teach 
their fellowmen to come to God by any other 
way than that of faith in Christ, for they are 
preaching a new and a false gospel.—Ver. 5. 
HxepinGerR:—-When God’s honor and the welfare 
of your neighbor is suffering, do not hesitate to 
check the vile devil, and defy him, however lofty 
his pretentions.—Ver. 17. Better be poor and 
unknown than to harm the church and its work. 
The more humble, the more likely to be sincere! 
—Ver. 8. Churches should assist one another, 
as members of the same great body.—Ver. 9. 
Preachers should be ashamed to beg, but not to 
be poor.—Ver. 11. One of the best marks of a spi- 
ritual shepherd, is a fatherly love to his people. 
‘God knoweth,”’ is a real oath, and we need not 
be afraid to use it in attestation of the truth, 
‘but only when the cause is important, and nearly 
connected with God’s honor. — Ver. 12. How 
many sins would never be committed, if we were 
more careful to remove all occasions for sin.— 
Vy. 18-15. Hepincer:—Satan can put on the 
face of an angel, and hypocrites can prate 
smoothly of righteousness. To speak, to teach, 
and to preach fluently are no great things; but 
to work faithfully and zealously, and to have a 
right spirit, are of the utmost importance. Try 
the spirits! (1 Jno. iv. 1). Trust nothing to 
mere appearances, though angelic. Be satisfied 
with nothing but God’s own Word, for that con- 
tains all you need for salvation. The damna- 
tion of heretics and of factions never slumbers 
(2 Pet. ii. 8).—Ver. 16. Preachers have the best 
of reasons for defending the honor of their office 
and their perSonal character against all who 
vilify them, for in this way good men are much 
aided, and bad men are effectually thwarted.— 
Ver. 19. Hepincer:—We often bear more from 
those who deceive and seduce us, than from those 
who are faithful to us, and it is in this way that 
God punishes us for our sins (Amos v. 13).— 
Ver. 20. People are often obliged to yield to the 
devil a thousand fold, what they have withheld 
from Christ and His faithful ministers (Hos. ii. 
8).—Ver. 21. If those who preach the Gospel, 
faithfully perform their duties, they will often 
be obliged to speak unwelcome truth, and expose 
errors, that those who oppose themselves may be 
put to shame.—Ver. 22. It isa great mercy, for 
which we cannot be too thankful, to belong toa 
good family.—Ver. 23. The highest glory of a 
minister and of every Christian, is to suffer and 
to be afflicted much for righteousness’ sake (Rom. 
vy. 3).—Ver. 25. Let us never cast away our con- 
fidence in God!—Ver. 26. You can never get 
away from perils; therefore, fear God and pray! 
God’s best servants must not unfrequently expe- 
rience severe trials from their own countrymen, 
and even from those of kindred faith.—Ver. 27. 
The more neglected a congregation has been, the 
severer the labor it will need for its spiritual 
cultivation. But let the servant of God be faith- 
ful, and the Lord will be his portion and his re- 
ward. The cares of a faithful minister wilk 
doubtless give him many a sleepless night; but 


192 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





groaning and weeping before the Lord will at 
last restore him to rest and sleep —Ver. 28. 
God’s true servants have frequently not an hour 
which is not occupied with preaching, instruct- 
ing, counselling, visiting, comforting, praying, 
studying, ete.—Ver. 29. Those who have them- 
selves acquired strength, skill, and experience, 
should sympathize with and strengthen those 
who are still weak in faith and practice. An 
earnest minister will have his righteous indigna- 
tion and holy zeal enkindled when his people 
are made to stumble before his eyes.—Ver. 30. 
Hepincer :—We should never boast of our sins, 
but if we have endured afflictions, and experi- 
enced Divine consolations, let these be our glory. 
—Ver. 31. A solemn affirmation or an oath, is 
in truth a prayer. If, therefore, it is right to 
pray, it is right to take an oath, if the honor of 
God, the good of our neighbor, and the cause of 
truth and righteousness demand it.—Vers. 32, 33. 
Even in extreme perils, and when every way 
and opening seems closed against us, God knows 
how to deliver us. But we should never rely 
upon extraordinary methods, as long as a way 
of escape, however singular, is possible to our 
own efforts. 

Berens. Biste.—Ver. 1. God has such a 
zeal for souls, that He will have them entirely to 
Himself. Christ has purchased them with His 
own blood and now He sends His servants to 
bring them to Him.—Ver. 8. There is no better 
preservative of our virginal simplicity and inno- 
cence, than a perpetual consciousness of our 
great perils. The devil, having crept like a ser- 
pent, into the inmost soul and poisoned it with 
corrupt imaginations, throws out from that cen- 
tral point, over every object some deceitful ex- 
citement to evil. He always has free access to 
our minds as long as our wills and inclinations 
are not in subjection to Christ. »He can corrupt 
us only by turning us from our simplicity with re- 
spect to Christ; i. e., from looking with a steady 
eye upon Him alone, as to our true and only 
Husband. This is that genuine chastity of the 
soul which depends upon Him alone, and allows 
nothing inthe world to rival Him.—Ver. 12. 
It is no small part of our religion to guard 
against the assaults of the devil.—Ver. 13. 
Honesty and simplicity are characteristics of a 
genuine laborer. Those who fear no danger 
never try the spirits, for they have never proved 
their own selves.—Ver. 14. Had not Satan suc- 
ceeded in concealing his own wickedness under 
forms of a self-imposed devotion and a worship 
adorned with every thing to flatter the human 
heart, he would never have kept the people for 
so long a time in fancied security and false peace. 
The light of God he has often withheld from the 
people under the pretence of some good intention 
or of communicating some higher knowledge.— 
Ver. 15. When godless men preach, and are 
heard and tolerated perhaps with delight, the 
devil has none to hinder him, and he comes as 
an angel of light and in the name of Christ, to 
destroy souls by the thousand.—No man can be 
a minister of Christ who is not himself a righ- 
teous man and who does not utter with his life 
what he speaks with his lips.—Ver. 19. Cunning 
men love most those who are like themselves.— 
Men are so blind that they would rather have 
bondage and a galling yoke of their fellowmen, 





than the sweet liberty of Christ. Those who ex. 
slave them to some human system, acquire more 
importance, authority and power than those whe 
commend the easy yoke of Jesus.—Ver. 23. God 
brings out how much His saints endure, that men 
may see the difference between such sufferings, 
and those of which many boast, no small part of 
which were brought upon themselves by their 
own fault, and others were only imaginary.— 
Ver. 25. In Jesus Christ shame has been made 


honorable, pain awakens joy, and toils refresh - 


us.—Ver. 26. The more an instrument is used 
in God’s hands, the more polished it becomes, 
and when it needs repair He sharpens it by suf- 
ferings.—(Spiritual hints:) Ver. 26. Perils of 
murderers: the world, the flesh, and the devil, 
who endeavor to rob us of grace; in the city: 
from intercourse with every kind of men; in the 
wilderness: temptations of solitude.—Ver. 27. 
Troubles, for the sake of wisdom; hunger and 
thirst after God and his righteousness; fastings 
(Mark ii. 20), want of comfort; cold, the warmth 
of the Divine presence gone; nakedness, (with- 
in).—Ver. 28: It is a vain excuse when any al- 
lege that they cannot give themselves to prayer 
because they haye so much to do.—Ver. 29, It 
should grieve me to hear of another’s distress, 
and in his afflictions I should be afflicted.—When 
God is dishonored by prevailing wickedness and 
sins, it should be a fire in our hearts to consume 
us.—Ver. 30. The world is so much given to ly- 
ing, that even an Apostle feared he would not be 
believed, unless he called God for a witness. 
RieGcER:—VeER. 3. We may see in the fall of 
our first parents, as in a glass, how much our 
souls are in danger of being seduced by lies. 
Without a direct intention to do wrong, one may 
be so utterly crazed that in the first place his 
understanding and then his heart is taken as it 
were by storm, his entire dependence upon 
Christ, and the supply of his fruitful energy 
from Christ is interrupted, and he imagines that 
he can make more rapid progress in some other 
way than by a simple dependence upon Christ. 
—Ver. 4. We always make a very different thing 
from the gospel when we attempt to improve 
what Christ has given us.—Ver. 7ff. The gospel 
of the heavenly kingdom can never be preached 


without a heavenly mind and a low estimate of. 


earthly things.—Vy. 10, 11. The heart can be 
judged only by Him who searches the heart.— 
Ver. 12ff. The world never gives a good name to 
those who zealously oppose prevailing errors. 
The only virtue it sees in a minister is a mode, 


ration which is generally nothing but lukewarm. ~ 


ness which is loathsome to our ascended Lord! 
But even if no one acknowledges the propriety 
of his course, he will consider it an honor that 
he cannot endure them that are evil, and that he 
is allowed to expose deceitful workers and to 
show that they are liars.—ver. 16ff. It is very 
difficult for a Christian to understand how he is 
bound by the spirit of Christ to esteem others 
better than himself, when he finds that he is 
abused by deceitful and arrogant persons, for 
this very lowliness of spirit, and is obliged to 
separate himself from them. 

Nranper:—Ver. 80, The mental elevation of 
a Christian has its origin not like that of the 
Stoics in self-confidence but in the consciousness 
of human infirmity.—Ewatp: A Christian © 


CHAP. XI. 1-33. 


198 


—— τ“ -΄---- -΄-----ροΟ νκῬ-ὔ----.-..-----ς-ς--ς-ς--.----ς----ς---- Ὁ 


more inclined to glory in his infirmities than in 
his strength. W. Horacker: Vy. 23-380. The 
picture here given of the Apostle’s life, is full of 
instruction, for the direction of our own hearts 
and lives: 1. In our own calm and peaceful 
times for the church of Christ, we should thank- 
fully remember, the hard struggles, the bloody 
conflicts and the faitiful constancy which others 
had to maintain, to secure for us this costly pos- 
session. 2. What an amount of painful privation 
and distressing experience was brought within 
the narrow limits and the feeble capacity of a 
single life. In such a light how pitiable and con- 
temptible do we appear in our effeminate horror at 
suffering and our perpetual recoil from every 
cross. 3. The disciple of Christ can accomplish 
great and glorious things, if he will only make 
good use of his day of grace, and be thoroughly 
what he professes to be ;—very appropriately our 
motto might be: No rest for the flesh! 4. Inthe 
outer man the Apostle was feeble and frail, and 
yet through this very weakness Christ’s power 
was wonderfully glorified; on the same principle 
Christ now dispenses His Spirit and His gifts. 
Heusner:—Ver. 1. It is indeed foolish to 
boast. No wise and humble man will condescend 
to it, but from necessity, for the cause of God and 
for the welfare of others.—Ver. 2. The holy zeal 
a pastor feels for his people, has its source in a 
pure love to God and not in personal vanity, etc. 
—None but the pure, deserve the bridal honor, 
and the figure of a ‘‘virgin,” beautifully expresses 
the idea of a soul which loves none but Christ. — 
Ver. 3. Men listen with far greater pleasure to 
those corrupters who befool them and flatter their 
selfish passions, than to those who honestly tell 
them the truth. The simplicity which is in 
Christ, is that disposition which desires and be- 
lieves in nothing but what Christ teaches and 
which gives no heed to any professed improve- 
ments upon this.—Ver. 4, Let no one wrest from 
thee a pure Christianity, for what better system 
_can you have in its place?—Ver. 6. Fine words 
are not wisdom and are never enough to make a 
preacher. We must have something deeper for 
that.—Ver. 7. There is no surer way to mortify 
the pride of some persons than to make sacrifices 
in their behalf.—Ver. 13. Christianity has suf- 
fered more from unworthy professors, erroneous 
teachers, and hypocrites, than from open ene- 
mies. But by the side of every teacher of the 
truth, we shall always find some teacher of false- 
hood under the semblance of truth.—Ver. 14. If 
the evil spirit presented himself to men in his 
true form, they would be struck with horror. 
He therefore assumes some brilliant form that he 
may be received as an angel of light. His vilest 
ministers put on the face of saints, base pleasures 
assume the mask of love, eclipses of faith take 
the name of enlightenment, and an antipathy to 
the atonement puts on the semblance of a regard 
for strict morality. God permits the evil spirit 
in this manner to conceal his real form that his 
children may be trained to watchfulness and 
conflict.—Those who propagate error are Satan’s 
real though often unconscious ministers.—Ver. 
15. Satan’s servants make use of the same tricks 
as their master; and as in the end their mask 
must be torn from them and they must be judged 
by God Himself, we may be sure that their pun- 
13 





ishment will be terrible.—Ver. 19. An honest 
and profound love feels its keenest torture when 
it sees its objects unconscious of their own cor- 
ruption.—Ver. 20. False preachers leave to others 
the hard part of their work and then claim the 
credit and the benefit of its performance. They 
flatter and amuse men with the pretence of a 
better Christianity, and then wish to rule over 
and make a gain of God’s people. But their ob- 
ject is the fleece and not the flock. And yet 
mauy are greatly pleased with just such preach- 
ers, because their selfish passions are gratified, 
and they are displeased with those who are in 
earnest and present the truth with earnestness. 
Accordingly those who mislead and deceive men 
find ready listeners while genuine preachers lose 
their power and influence, and true friends are 
easily mistaken and sacrificed for false.—Ver. 
22. Those who esteem all things but loss for 
Christ, may yet when circumstances call for it, 
without inconsistency make use of every advan- 
tage of birth or fortune.—Ver. 23. In the per- 
formance of our duties there are various degrees 
with respect tothe amount of service, the abund- 
ance of the labors, and the completeness of the 
performance. Some are satisfied when they do 
what is customary, indispensably necessary, or 
essential to their office; while others do that 
which is extraordinary. There are both phleg- 
matic and sanguine temperaments; and yet there 
can be in the sight of God no works of superero- 
gation (Luke xvii. 10). It is one of the best marks 
of a faithful minister to be always in earnest and 
attentive to his duties. 

W. F. Besser :—Ver. 2. The church consists 
of not many brides, but she is herself the only 
bride of Christ. The churches to which the Spi- 
rit spoke (Rey. ii. 7), were the Bride which, im- 
mediately after the Spirit, said, Come (Rev. 
xxii. 17)! Individual Christians and individual 
churches are allowed to remain together in the 
bridal chamber where Christ graciously dwells by 
the dispensation of his word and sacraments; and 
there they are all organized as distinct members 
into one great body. to be nourished and che- 
rished by him as a wife by her husband and 
head (Eph. v. 29). Every division, whether 
among Christians of the same congregation, or 
among different congregations, is a division in 
this great body (1 Cor. xii. 25) and impairs the 
bridal purity of the virgin to be presented to 
Christ.—Ver. 13. Those who wickedly resolve to 
see nothing in the world but black, shall have 
their reward in seeking nothing but black. The 
slanderous disposition of the enemies of truth, is 
a sure sign that their damnation slumbers not.— 
Ver. 14. Tertullian called Satan ‘‘God’s ape.” 
All the mysterious names which the god of this 
world (Eph. ii. 2) has written upon his forehead, 
such as enlightenment, progress, freedom, equa- 
lity, education, etc., are only new forms of the 
old serpent’s words.—Ver. 15. The only security 
against wandering into unrighteousness and a 
godless life, is a faithful adherence to the right- 
eousness which is by faith in Christ Jesus.—The 
voice of the Spirit, through our Epistle, speaks 
not to the Corinthian Church alone but to every 
church and to every age of Christendom. It is 
a perpetual call upon the Bride to be ever on μοῦ 
guard against the plausible insinuations of the 


194 





old serpent, lest her mind should be corrupted 
from the simplicity into which Christ has called 
us by His Gospel. Oh happy he who yields him- 
self unreservedly to Christ and follows Him with 
all the heart !—Ver. 20. In every instance where 
men have been led away from the church and 
from Christ its head, God has visited upon the 
apostate people the evils which are mentioned in 
this passage. In every age, just as in Corinth, 
false teachers endeavor to alienate the people 
from God’s true ministers, by accusing these of 
crimes which are calculated to destroy their in- 
fluence. But no sooner do they succeed in making 
their dupes completely dependent upon then, 
than they are themselves guilty of the very crimes 
which they had falsely charged upon others.— 
Vv. 23-27. Drones are seldom seen where the 
working bees are collecting honey. 

[Paul’s personal vindication of himself. In- 
troduction: apology for pursuing the subject, 
vy. 1-4. 1. His love for them, and his jeal- 
ousy—he had brought them to Christ, ver. 2, 
and he had grounds for apprehension, ver. 3. 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


--ς- ΄.- 


1. Equality with the best, νου. ὅ. 2. Especially 
in knowledge of Divine things, ver.6 a. 8. In 
those practical proofs which demonstrated his 
Apostleship, ver. 6 ὁ. II. His proofs, vv. 7-88 
Not in great dignities and shining qualities, ver 
7, but in, 1. His disinterested love to the Church, 
vv. 7-21, (1) he had given up his rights to a 
support, (and to supply their defect, had (a) ex- 
hausted himself, Acts xviii. 3, and (δ) robbed 
others, ver. 8; (2) he had been actuated by a 
sincere love to them, not by indifference nor 
pride, vv. 11, 12, and (8) his course was in fa- 
vorable contrast with that of his opponents, vy. 
13-22 (for nothwithstanding their outward show, 
they were no better (much less) than he, ver. 12, 
and they were as bad as they accused him of 
being, vv. 20, 21). 2. His relations to the cove- 
nant people of God, ver. 22. 3. His conduct as a 
minister of Christ, vv. 28-83; here he was supe- 
rior to them, not in things of which men usually 
boast, but in labors, ver. 23, in sufferings, vv. 
23-27, in cares, ver. 28, in zeal for those in 
peril, ver. 29, and in the humble use of means 


2. He had no reason to expect they would gain | for his deliverance, vv. 31-33]. 


by the change, ver. 4. I. His claim, vv. ὃ, 6. 


XV.—HIS REVELATIONS AS A GROUND FOR BOASTING (1ff.). 


HOW HE HAD BEEN 


KEPT FROM SELF-EXALTATION, AND BEEN LED TO GLORY IN HIS INFIRMI- 


TIES (7ff.). 


HOW HE OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN SAVED THE NECESSITY OF SUCH 


SELF-COMMENDATION BY THE CORINTHIANS THEMSELVES (11ff.). 


CuarTer XII. 1-18, 


Ir is not expedient for me doubtless to glory, [I must needs! boast: it is not expe- 

2 dient for me, for?] I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I knew 
[know, οἶδα] a man in Christ above [om. above] fourteen years ago, (whether in the 
body, I cannot tell [know not, οἶδα], or whether out of the body, I cannot tell [know 
not]; God knoweth): such an one caught up to [even unto, ἕως] the third heaven. 

3 And I knew [know] such a man, (whether in the body, or out of [apart from, γωρὶς " 
4 the body, I cannot tell [know πού; God knoweth: How [om. how] that he was 
caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a 

5 [om. a, ἀνϑρώπῳ] man to utter. Of such a one will I glory: yet of myself I will not 
6 glory, but in mine’ infirmities. For though I would [should] desire to glory, I shall 
not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now [om. now] I forbear, lest any man 
should think of me above that which he seeth me ¢o be, or® that he heareth of [from, 
ἐξ] me. And lest’ I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the 
revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger [an angel, 
8 ἄγγελος] of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.* For [con- 
cerning, ὑπὲρ] this thing [angel] I besought the Lord thrice, that it [he] might de- 

9 part from me. And He [hath, εἴἤρηχέν] said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: 
for my [om. my*] strength is made perfect! in weakness. Most gladly therefore will 
I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest [abide] upon me © 
Therefore I take pleasure [am well contented, εὐδοχῶ] in infirmities, in reproaches, in 
necessities, in persecutions, in™ distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then 
am I strong. I am become a fool in glorying [om. in glorying”]; ye have compelled 
me: for 1 ought to have been commended of you: for in nothirg am [was, ὑστέρησα] 1 


-1 


10 
“at 


CHAP. XII. 1--18. 195 














behind the very chiefest [these overmuch, ὑπερλίαν] apostles, though I be nothing. 
Truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in [by’*] signs 
and wonders and mighty deeds. For what is it wherein ye were inferior“ to other 
churches, except zt be that I myself was not burdensome to you? forgive me this 
wrong. Behold, the” third time I am ready to come to you; and I will not be bur- 
densome to you [om. to γου δ] : for I seek not yours, but you: for the children ought 
not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children. And I will very 
gladly spend and be spent for you [your souls, τῶν ψυχῶν]; though [if, é:'7] the more 
abundantly I love you, the less I be loved. But be it so, I did not burden you: 
17 nevertheless, being crafty, Γ caught you with guile. Did I make a gain of you by any 
18 of them whom I sent unto you? I desired [besought, παρεχάλεσα)] Titus [to go to 
you] and with him I sent a[the] brother. Did Titus make a gain of you? walked 
we not in the same spirit? walked we not in the same steps? 


12 
13 


14 
15 
16 


1 Ver. 1.—Rec. and Tisch. have δὴ, others δὲ, The best authorities are in favor of δεῖ. The apparent want of connec 
tion gave occasion for changing it into δὴ, δὲ, εἰ---δεῖ (δεῖ was not transferred from chap. xi. 30). [Authorities now seem 
evenly balanced between the three. Avy has in its favor K. M., most of the cursives, the Arm. vers., and (on such a point) 
the powerful testimony of all the Greek Fathers; δὲ has D. (1st hand) Sin. 114, Copt. Slav. and Latin versions, and 
Theophyl.; and δεῖ has B. Ὁ. (8d hand) E. F. G. L. Sin. (8d hand), many cursives, the Syr. Arm. Vulg. Ital. verss., and Am- 
brosiast. But as Tisch. suggests, Β. is evideutly corrupted here by (εἰ---καὶ), and δὲ and δεῖ were most likely to be derived 
from δὴ, and as the most difficult reading. and the one most consistent with the ironical] style of this section, the latter 
has much the best internal evidence. It is adopted by Bloomf., de Wette, Reiche, Alford, Wordsworth, Conybeare, and 
Hodge, while Lachmann, Meyer, Osiander, and Stanley adopt δεῖ]. 

2 Ver. 1.—Lachmann has ov συμφέρον μὲν, ἐλεύσομαι δὲ (B. δὲ καὶ), on authorities by no means the highest. [B. F: G. 
Sin. some curss. and verss. (the Copt. Latin Fathers, Damasc. and Vulg., add καὶ with B.)]. The Rec. οὐ συμφέρει μοι" 
ἐλεύσ. yap is the more difficult reading on account of yap, aud μὲν---δὲ are evidently corrections to make the sense clearer. 
[The reading συμφέρον can only be retained with μὲν---δὲ, The variations are very considerable here, but the Rec. is sus- 
tained by most of the uncials and cursives, and especially by the verss. (except the Lat. and Vulg.) and the Greek Fathers; 
and if original it most easily accounts for the variations]. 

3 Ver. 3.—Rec. has ἐκτός, but it was probably taken from ver. 2; for χωρίς is well sustained. [Sin. D.(2d and 3d hand) 
E. (2d hand) F. G. K. L. M. have ἐκτός ; but B. Ὁ. (1st hand), Εἰ. (1st hand) and Method. have χωρίς]. 

4 Ver. 3.—Lachmann leaves out οὐκ οἶδα, but without sufficient authority [only that of the Vatican and apne 

5 Ver. 5.—Lachm. throws out μον, but on insufficient evidence. [The only important MSS. for the omission are B. Ὁ. (1st 
hand), with the Copt. Syr. (both) and Arm. versions; while D. (3d hand) E. F. G. K. L. M. Sin. Vulg. and the Fathers insert it}. 

6 Ver. 6.—Tv is wanting in many, and even in some of the better MSS. [B. Ὁ. (8d hand) E.(2d hand) F. G. Sin. Vulg.]; 
but it probably was omitted because it disturbed the sense of the passage, or at least seemed superfluous. 

Ver. 7.—Before the first ἵνα Lachmann inserts διὸ after A. B. F. G. [and Sin.], etal. But “it was probably an inter- 
polation, to disconnect this sentence with the preceding.” [The words καὶ τῇ ὑπερβ. τῶν ἀποκ. were united in sense with 
εἰ μὴ ἐν ταῖς ἀσθεν. (ver. 5). making ἐὰν---γᾶρ ἐξ ἐμον a parenthesis, and then Διὸ ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι. (ver. 7) began a new 
sentence. It must be conceded that the documentary evidence for this word is now very strong, and Stanley has adopted 
it If it is accepted, the punctuation which is meutioned above must also be adopted, viz.: “I will not glory except in my 
infi ae in the abundance of my revelations. Wherefore, also, lest I should be exalted above measure, there was 
given.” eéc.]. 

8Ver.7. Some important MSS.[A. Ὁ. E. F. 6. Sin. 17, and many versions and fathers] leave out iva μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι, 
from not recognizing the emphasis which the Apostle meant to give by the repetition of these words (Meyer). 

9 Ver. 9.—Rec. after δύναμις inserts μου, which deserves to be retained, though left out by important MSS., on account 
of its necessity to the sense. It might easily have been overlooked after—pis—pis. [And yet Β. Ὁ. F. G. Sin. and many 
verss. and fathers (Tisch., Bengel, Lachm., Stanley) omit 10]. 

10 Ver. 9.—TeAcirat is well authenticated [with A. B. D. F. Sin.]. Rec. τελειοῦται was doubtless a gloss [with D. (8d 
hand) K. L. Sin. (8d hand) Orig. and Athan.]. 

[11 Ver. 10.—Both B. and Sin. leave out ἐν before orevoxwpiats]. 

12 Ver. 11.—Rec. has καυχώμενος after ἄφρων ; an exegetical addition, and feebly sustained [with only L., many cur- 
sives, the Goth. and Syr. (both) versions, and some Greek Fathers]. 

13 Ver. 12.—Rec. has ἐν before σημείοις, but according to the preponderance of evidence [A. B. Ὁ. F. Sin., ef al.] it 
should be erased: it was a repetition from the preceding clause. 

14 Ver. 13.—Instead of ἡττήθητε Lachm. has ἡσσώθῃτε; but the latter was evidently an error of the transcribers. [B. 
D. Sin. 17 (Alford) have ἧσσωθ. Tisch. with A. Ὁ. (2d and 3d hand) K. L. and the Greek Fathers have ἡττήθ.]. 

16 Ver. 14.—We are not certain about τοῦτο. [Rec. omits it, but it is given in A. B. F. G. Sin. Ital. Vulg. Goth. Syr. 
Arm. #th. and most of the fathers]. It has different positions, being sometimes before, and sometimes after τρίτον. 
Perhaps taken from chap. xiii. 1. 

16 Ver. 14.—Rec. after καταναρκ. has ὑμῶν. Some MSS. have ὑμᾶς. Neither were original [A. B. Sin., ef al. omit both]. 

17 Ver. 15.—ei καὶ. A, B. F.G. [Sin.] have only εἰ, and a number of MSS. leave both words entirely out. Exeget. 
explanations. 


temptation to exalt himself (comp. vers. 7ff.). 
Aci must be taken in an absolute sense, equiva- 
lent to, ἐξ must be so. It is not necessary to con- 
nect ot with it. The γάρ introduces the reason 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
Vers. 1-6.—It is necessary to boast; it 


is not for my advantage, for I will come 
to visions and revelations of the Lord. 
—Although we should not regard the Apos- 
tle as precisely breaking off from a special his- 
tory commenced in the last two verses (Meyer), 
he certainly passes now to a new subject of boast- 
ing (καύχησις). Ina preface composed of short 
sentences grammatically unconnected (asynde- 
ton) but logically arranged, he declares that 
under the circumstances he could not avoid self- 
commendation, but that in a moral respect it was 
not expedient, inasmuch as it exposed him to the 


why he once more speaks in self-commendation. 
It is that he was about to relate something which 
might incline him to an unprofitable self-exalta- 
tion (comp. ver. 7). With less simplicity, Meyer 
thinks that because boasting was unprofitable, 
Paul was anxious to pass on to something in which 
there was no self-commendation (ver. 5), and he 
thinks that. ov συμφέρει μοι is thus accounted for 
and justified, although he himself notices what 
the Apostle says in ver. 7 of self-exaltation on 
account of the abundance of the revelations. If 
we adopt the reading of the Receptus, the idea of 


196 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


I 


the Apostle would be: Truly it is not expedient 
for me to glory (comp. chap. xi. 1, 17, 80). The 
reason for this he would assign by pointing to 
the elevating character of his subsequent glory- 
ing, for it is implied that the danger would be 
more imminent, the more exalted the boast and 
its object was. Thus Osiander, who adheres to 
the Receptus, explains it, but essentially concedes 
that the original clause with δεῖ would have 
seemed so very abrupt, and the asyndeton so 
unusually harsh, that a plausible reason was 
presented for a change. It will not do to lay the 
emphasis upon μοὶ, as if Paul had meant that it 
was not for his own, but for their good that he 
boasted himself (ἡ, e., to correct their judgment 
respecting himself, Reiche), for this would have 
required οὐκ ἐμοί, or ἐμαυτῷ, or at least ἐμοί, in- 
stead of μοι. The things of which he now be- 
gins to speak are visions and revelations of the 
Lord (ὑπτασίαι καὶ ἀποκαλύψεις κυρίου). Κυρίου is 
the genitive, not of the object, but of the subject 
[- e., not respecting, but from, the Lord]. No- 
thing is said in the context which implies that 
the transaction here spoken of was a vision of 
Christ, in which the Lord was revealed to him 
(the way of speaking is different in 1 Cor. ix. 1; 
Gal. i. 16). Christ had given him disclosures 
and revelations of himself (1 Cor. xiv. 6). The 
visions (ὀπτασία!), however, describe the form in 





(* Wordsworth still thinks that μοι is emphatic in con- 
trast with ὀπτασίας κ. ἀποκαλύψεις, and with κυρίου (hence 
each of these words are contrasted in position at the end of 
their respective sentences): to glory is not proper or expe- 
dient for one like me; I will new, therefore. proceed to such 
things as have been vouchsafed to me by the Lord. Alford 
thinks that Paul did actually desist from all boasting here, 
and that he now proceeds to give a vision and revelation 
which was intended to show the folly of it (yap); Stanley, 
that Paul intended here to cease all boasting of himself, but 
that the necessities of his position repeatedly overcame his 
reluctance, and betrayed him into boasting again, though 
more and more of things which really huinbled him. Dr. 
Hodge also thinks that Paul did actually desist at this 
point, and came to such thinys as involved no real boasting, 
but rather a personal humiliation and a recital of God’s 
goodness. Indeed, most of the interpretations, though 
resting upon different readings and explanations of the 
words and connection, come finally to the same thought in 
only different shades. There are contrasted, what was ne- 
cessary to his position with what was proper and useful to 
his person; what related to him as a carnal man with what 
related to his infirmities as a spiritual man; and what was 
done by him with what was done by the Lord. He therefore 
says: 1 know that boasting of myself is not calculated to 
benefit me in the higher sense as an individual, but I am 
compelled by the circumstances in which you Corinthians 
are, to do something which would ordinarily be so called,— 
and yet what I have to say will only be humiliating to me 
as a man, while it tells what wonderful things God has done 
for me, and proves conclusively my claims as one of the 
highest Apostles. W.F. Besser: “The ‘high Apostles’ at 
Corinth could lay no claim to such things as had been men- 
tioned in the preceding chapter, but they spoke much of 
their numerous visions and revelations. What had the 
Apostle to set off against these? He would have told the 
truth if he had spoken of many of his glorious revelations, 
but he would allude only to one, of which he had hitherto 
been silent, at least among the Corinthians; and of this he 
would speak only in a way to show the evident difference 
between a modest discourse and a carnal prating of personal 
distinctions. He had experienced a holy joy when his faith 
in the invisible realities of the Christian hope had been 
strengthened by a holy trance, but he was nut inclined to 
describe in a wordy style what he had then seen and heard. 
He was rather disposed to bring forward an humbling inci- 
dent connected with it, in which he became painfully con- 
scious of his sinful infirmity,—a thorn in the flesh, an angel 
of Satan, and an earnest prayer,—when he had been favored 
with a promise of inexpressible consolation, and was led to 
boast that when he was weak in himself, he was strong in 
the Lord.” » He thus shows that a spiritual grace obtained 
even by a painful experience was of far greater value than 
the most exalted outward privilege]. 











which he had received them. No further nor 
profounder disclosures are intended by the reve- 
lations (a7roxdAvwperc ) than by the visions (ὀπτασίαι). 
Osiander thinks that the words describe two 
ways in which supersensual objects are pre- 
sented: one by a figurative apparition for the 
eye, and the other by means of sound for the 
ear. The Berlend. Bible makes visions refer to 
those representations of heavenly forms which 
the Holy Ghost makes to the inward spirit of 
man, in a Divine light and in a spiritual manner; 
and revelations (the higher manifestation) to that 
thorough enlightenment of the mind and heart 
by the Holy Ghost ia which we learn the true 
mind of the Spirit. W. F. Besser: From the 
very commencement of his Christian experience, 
the Lord had allowed Paul to see in visions and 
to hear in revelations those mysteries which be- 
longed to a world invisible and imperceptible to 
the external sense. By Christ’s own appearance 
to him at first (Acts xxii. 15; xxvi. 16), his want 
of outward evidence through the eye and ear had 
been made up to him in an extraordinary man- 
ner, and his authority had been made equal to 
that of the twelve Apostles. The visions (ὀπτασίαι) 
may designate the general form in which the re- 
velation was made, but in addition to them an 
explanation of the visible objects was given by 
words addressed to the ear (as in the propheti- 
cal visions). We feel obliged, with Meyer, to 


| maintain that we have no evidence that Paul had 


in view here some pretensions of his opponents 
with respect to which he wishes to show that he 
had the advantage of them, for nothing in the 
context seems to imply that his object was to 
show that an external acquaintance with Christ 
was unnecessary to the Apostolical character 
(Baur), nor to show that he was quite equal to 
the Christ-party who boasted largely of visions. 
I know aman in Christ, fourteen years 
ago (whether in the body I know not, 
or whether out of the body I know not, 
God knows), such a one was rapt as 
far as the third heaven (ver. 2). The 
Apostle here affords a specimen of what he 
had just given only an intimation. It is 
certainly inconsistent with the context and 
with the general aim of the writer to main-~ 
tain that he was here giving an account of 
some other person than himself.* It was per- 
fectly accordant with the nature of the occurrence 





ΓΕ And yet J. E. C. Schmidt, of Giessen, in his Clavis on 
the N. T., has maintained this opinion with no little degree | 
of plausibility. His main points are, the repeated declaration 
of the Apostle that he was not boasting of himself, his use 
of the third person, the strong contrast between τοῦ τοιούτου 
and ἐμαυτοῦ in ver. 5, and his assertion that he would spare 
his readers (φείδομαι) this very thing. According to him, 
the course of thought is: ‘It is not expedient for me to 
boast: I will come to those visions and revelations of which 
my opponents make so much. I am reminded of a man 
whom I knew long since (and who perhaps was claimed by 
Paul’s opponents to be of their party). Of such a thing 
(neuter), or of such a man (masculine), I am prepared to 
boast, as of an incident or person in which is shown the ex- 
tent of the grace I preach. I also might personally boast 
of such things without vanity, for I should say the truth,— 
but of myself J will not, except of my infirmities, lest any 
one should think of me above what he sees me to be. And 
lest I should be exalted above measure for these revelationg 
(from the detail of which I forbear), there was given to me 
a thorn,’ efc. This view would avoid the appearance of in 
consistency in the Apostle 7. ¢., of refusing to boast, and yet 
appearing continually to do so, but it seems altogether too 
constrained, especially in its explanation of ὑπὲρ τ. τοιούτου 
καυχ. in ver. δ]. 


CHAP. XII. 1-18. 





for him to speak of such anoccurrence in the third 
person, inasmuch as the individual spoken of was 
in a passive state, and might seem in his normal 
state of activity as another person (Meyer). Osi- 
ander suggests that his own proper person had 
become estranged to him in his ecstatic state, and 
was here conceived of as still remaining with the 
Lord. [Oida should be translated, not: I knew, 
but: 7 know]. It may be doubted whether the 
word has any special emphasis, as if the Apostle 
intended to give prominence to his complete cer- 
tainty about a fact which might be questioned by 
many on account of its extraordinary character 
(Osiander). A man in Christ signifies a Christian, 
and not a minister of Christ. He is not, indeed, 
expressly speaking of himself. Nranprer: ‘‘It 
is an expression in which Paul distinguishes be- 
tween that which he had become by the grace of 
God and that which was merely human in him- 
self.’ There is, however, no very obvious con- 
trast between the humble ‘man’ and the exalted 
character of the revelation. Jn Christ indicates 
that the man was in the great general fellowship 
of the common faith. The words imply nothing 
connected with the ecstasy, and still less do they 
have a special bearing against the suspicion of a 
demoniac ecstasy. The precise statement of the 
time belongs to ἁρπαγέντα (from which it is sep- 
arated only by a parenthesis: écre—oldev), and not 
to ἄνϑρ. ἐν χριστῷ, as if he had intended to say, 
a man who has been serving Christ fourteen 
years. The reason he so accurately specifies it 
was, that the occurrence was particularly im- 
portant to him, and peculiarly appropriate to his 
representation of what pertained to a third per- 
son. There can be no reference here to events 
attending his conversion, which must have taken 
place from seventeen to eighteen or even twenty 
years before the composition of this Epistle. 
Even if chronology were not against supposing 
that he here referred to the appearance in the 
Temple mentioned in Acts xxii. 17-21, the facts 
related in the two visions are essentially so dif- 
ferent that we cannot suppose them the same. 
The only way to meet this is (with Osiander) to 
suppose that there were different elements in 
this ecstasy, and that what is here mentioned was 
only the culminating point. With this view it 
would be chronologically connected with chap. xi. 
82-33. [Atrorp: ‘‘The date probably refers 
back to the time when he was at Tarsus waiting 
for God to point out his work, between Acts ix. 
80 and xi. 25.” WorpswortuH says: ‘‘ Fourteen 
years, reckoned inclusively, carry us back to the 
time of St. Paul’s ordination to the Apostleship 
of the Gentiles, which must not be confounded 
with the time of his conversion to Christianity.” 
*‘Probably this vision and revelation were 
vouchsafed to him then, because he was going 
forth for the first time to incur shame and suf- 
fering,’ and they were not communicated to the 
world until fourteen years afterwards, and even 
then only as facts and not in detail, because they 
were designed only for him, and for such a pur- 
pose. On this use of πρὸ, Webster says: ‘The 
primary idea of πρό is, in sight, and it is ap- 
plied to what is before one, in some place opposite, 
in view. From this meaning it passes on to denote 
priority in time, and so with a trajection in its 
use it signifies here, before, in time.” Syntax and 





197 





Synn. p. 150]. We have no other account of what 
is here related. With respect to the manner in 
which it took place, the Apostle was entirely un- 
certain. He was not sure that the soul retained 
any connection with the body. The latter may 
have been raised by the Spirit’s power along with 
Paul’s spirit into heavenly regions, or this connec- 
tion may have been for the time dissolved, and 
his spirit rapt away from its earthly tenement. 
In a word, the whole person, composed of his 
soul and his body together, or his soul alone, 
separate from his body (or at least without any 
of its external functions) was lifted up into a 
celestial world. ‘Apzayévra signifies much more 
than the different varieties of subjective mental 
vision, whether accompanied by bodily mental 
perceptions or not. The uncertainty here ex- 
pressed does not refer to the question, whether 
this was a mere vision (ἐν), or an actual trance 
of the spirit (ἐκτός). Any doubt on such a point 
would have seriously impaired the importance 
of the occurrence itself (comp. Meyer, Osiander). 
We have no means of determining to which of 
these suppositions, the ἐν or the ἐκτός) the Apostle 
was most inclined. But the whole representation 
which he gives makes it probable that the ascent 
was real and in actual space, and not merely 
ideal.* Hite, εἴτε have here the sense of: whether, 
or whether. “Αρπαγῆναι, is spoken of sudden, 
involuntary removals from one place to another 
(comp. Acts viii. 89; Rev. xii. 5; 1 Thess. iv. 17), 
[and it here implies great celerity and the power 
of some external force].—And I know such 
a man (whether in the body or out of the 
body I know not, God knows); that he 
was caught up into Paradise (vv. 3, 4 a.).— 
In the words, such a man (τὸν τοιοῦτον) the Apos- 
tle recurs to the subject of the ecstasy, the one he 
had before described as the man in Christ. Osi- 
ander, thinks that the phrase, such a man, con- 
tains an allusion to the fact, that he is now en- 
dowed with qualities which fitted him for such 
an exaltation. The point reached in the course 
of his ecstasy under the influence of the higher 
power (the Spirit of God) which had taken pos- 
session of him, he calls the third heaven (τρίτος 
ovpavéc). This is not to be interpreted spiri- 
tually of the utmost degree of Divine knowledge, 
etc. (the number three being taken simply as a 
symbol of perfection), for the Apostle had un- 





[* “ We may conceive the soul to receive a supernatural 
vision, either while it remaineth still in the body, or by its 
departing from the body for a season. The latter may not 
be called a death, because either the sensitive, or at least 
the vegetative, soul or faculty continues meanwhile in the 
body, either naturally or miraculously vivificating it. 
Again, we may conceive a man’s spirit remaining in the 
body, to receive such visions, two several ways: either bya 
real rapture of both body and spirit into that place, whereof 
the soul or spirit hath such a vision; or else by a represen- 
tation of such things really absent to the spirit, neither the 
body nor it changing at all their place; yet, as in dreams, 
the spirit apprehending a change of place, and a presence 
of the whole person to those persons and things, which it 
spiritually and supernaturally, and by the power of Gud, 
not by any operation of nature or fancy, beholds. This last, 
if not only, most commonly happeneth: and thus St. Paul’s 
rapture will be most agreeable with other Scripture-rapts. 
Rey. i. 10; xvii.3; xxi. 10; Acts xii. 11; Ezek. viii.3.”—Old 
Paraphrase and Annott. on Paul’s Epistles, published by 
the Oxford Angl. Society. “The infusion of spiritual in- 
fluences suspends at the same time the usual succession of 
ideas and the ordinary current of thought; the power of 
imagination alone remaining active, and the sense of spi- 
ritual vision being excited to the highest degree of in 
tensity.” —LEE on Inspiration.]} 


198 





questionably in his mind a higher sphere of the 
heavenly world. A plurality of heavens is not 
inconsistent with Scriptural doctrine, for some- 
thing of the kind is implied even in the plural 

heavens, οὐρανοί) here used, and in the description 

Heb. iv. 14) of Christ’s ascension, in which He 
is said to have passed into the heavens διεληλυϑέναι 
τοὺς οὐρανούς), the termination of which is de- 
scribed (Heb. ix. 24) as an entrance into heaven 
itself (εἰσελθεῖν εἰς αὐτὸν τὸν οὐρἀνόνῚ, ἱ. €., into the 
dwelling place of the Divine Majesty, to which 
the heavens he had passed through were related, 
just as the sanctuary in the tabernacle was re- 
lated to the holy of holies. Jewish tradition 
generally speaks of seven heavens (Rabbi Judah 
alone speaks of two). To such common views 
and forms of speech the Apostle doubtless had 
some reference, but the original idea must be dis- 
tinguished from the arbitrary and monstrous de- 
tails of the Rabbinical writers. As neither here 
nor elsewhere (except in some later ecclesiastical 
writers, who probably derived their views from 
the passage before us) is it necessarily implied 
that there were no more than three heavens, this 
third need not, of course, be regarded as the 
highest heaven. Neither here nor in Heb. iv. 14 
must we suppose the allusion to be to some region 
of the visible heavens (the clouds, etc.), but to 
some supersensous space between the stellar and 
the highest heaven, the true holy of holies (comp. 
Riem, d. Lehrbegr. des Hebr. Br. p. 512). And 
yet we must unquestionably make a distinction 
between this higher region called the third 
heaven, and the place called Paradise although it 
does not follow that the former must of course 
be a lower region than the latter). It does not 
seem probable that what is said in vy. 8 and 4, 
should be a mere repetition of what had been 
said in ver. 2.* On the other hand the Apostle 





(* The reasons for this opinion are not given by our au- 
thor, and seem to us not quite sufficient. The apparent 
repetition in the text is partially accounted for by the in- 
tervention of the parenthesis, and partially by the pecu- 
liarly abrupt and animated style which the recollection of 
the event occasioned. If the transaction mentioned in vy. 
3, 4 was different from that mentioned in ver. 2, then Para- 
dise must be a different place from the third heaven, as is 
contended for by Grotius and many Lutheran and English 
divines. The question then must arise, why was the visit 
to Paradise mentioned last, as if this were a higher sphere 
than that of the third heaven? If Paradise is (as all agree, 
and as Luke xxiii. 43 and Rey. ii. 7, compel us to believe), 
the abode of departed saints immediately after death, and if 
the third heaven is a different locality sg usually held by 
those who make this distinction, the abode of saints after the 
resurrection), we naturally inquire why was the visit to the 
lower sphere made after that to the higher? If we answer 
with Bp. Taylor (Fun. Serm. on Sir. G. Dalston Vol. IT. p. 
185), Bp. Bull (Works, Vol. I. Ser. IIT. p. 89), and Words- 
worth, that “the vision of the heavenly glory would not 
have satisfied Paul since it was to be attained only at the 
distant period of the resurrection, and hence that he was 
shown something to be entered upon immediately after 
death ;” not to insist on the fact that the prospect of the 
Parousia was not so very distant to the mind of Paul, we 
may suggest that this only shows that he needed to sce 
Paradise at some time, but not necessarily to see it last. 
The view of Augustine, Thomas, Estius and Calyin seems 
to us more strictly conformed to our passage, viz., that the 
third heaven included the whole world of the blessed, (the 
Father’s house with its many mansions) in some part (not 
necessarily some more interior part) of which was Paradise 
where the ascended Jesus abides with His saints. (Ben- 
gel: some inner recess in the third heaven, rather than the 
third heaven itself; an opinion very generally held by the 
ancients. See Greg. Obs.c. 18.) Whether the latter is dif- 
ferent from the home which the saints are to possess after 
ths resurrection is not determined by ver. 4, in which we 
recognize simply a more specific designation of the place 
than in ver. 2. 








THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





probably speaks in vy. 3 and 4 of a higher de- 
gree of ecstasy than that which he had mentioned 
in the other. And yet the Paradise was not ex- 
actly some interior department of the third hea- 
ven, but. some higher region, that which is called 
in Rev. ii. 7 the Paradise of God (the lower de- 
partment in Sheol, Luke xxiii. 48, comp. Luke 
xvi. 23). OsitanpeR: ‘*The abode in which the 
highest peace and joy are enjoyed, where fellow- 
ship with God and the God-man is most intimate, 
and where the world of spirits has its most de- 
lightful and most perfect development.” Nz- 
ANDER: ‘‘Paul here describes a higher degree of 
life in God, a foretaste of that which the soul 
will reach at a later period, no illusion of the 
imagination or product of Jewish superstition, 
but a certain and actual exaltation of the soul. 
And yet we may here distinguish between the 
supernatural and the divine on the one hand and 
the human on the other, and we may concede 
that. the representation here given to the Apostle 
was in that form which was most familiar to him 
in his actual state of mind at the time.”—And 
heard unspeakable words which it is 
not lawful for man to utter (ver. 4 4).— 
It is evident from the use of the word ἤκουσεν that 
ῥῆμα cannot here be equivalent to things, but 
that it must mean a word. But ἄῤῥητον signifies, 
not what cannot be expressed, for then the words 
could not have been perceived, but as the rela- 
tive sentence immediately following shows, words 
of such mysterious import as ought not to be 
uttered or to be generally known. In this sense 
the word is used in Herod. and other writers. 
᾿Ἐξόν is equivalent not to δυνατόν but to fas est. 
—The substance of the communication was so 
exalted that it would have been a profanation to — 
give it in human language. W. F. Besser: “It 
is likely that the substance of the heavenly 
words was taken up by the Apostle as he heard 
them, but he felt that no man after receiving 
such a communication in successive details, 
could find language adequately and worthily to 
express what he had heard in that sacred pre- 
sence. And even if God had given him power to 
express on earth what he had heard in heaven, 
there were no earthly ears which could intelli- 
gently receive the communication.” We cannot 
accept of Ewald’s explanation, that the reason 
Paul determined to keep these revelations to 
himself (revelations, as he thinks likely, of the 
final victory of Christ over Rome and heathenism, 
and also over Jerusalem and the Jews), was be- 
cause he saw that other men might easily be led 
to pervert them in many ways and then to ob-— 
tain credit on his authority. [These words were 
‘cunspeakable,” (not. only to Aim but to TF 
perhaps on account of their nature, but as Pa 
tells us that it was not ‘‘lawful to utter” them, 
we must suppose that he was restrained from 
uttering them principally by a moral reason. 
The whole vision appears to have been intended 
for the Apostle elone, to prepare him personally 
for his work, and for this reason alone he had no 
occasion to speak of it for fourteen years, and never 
to speak of its contents. The apocryphal litera 
ture of subsequent times, shows what follies the 
minds of men are inclined to, on such mysteries. 
(See the ἀναβάτικον Παύλου used by the sect of 
Caiani, mentioned by Epiphanius, Haeres: 18, 


CHAP. XII. 1-18. 


199 





88). But nothing in this passage implies that 
the Apostle possessed any arcana or mysteries 
on the general subject of salvation, which are to 
be withheld as dangerous matters, from common 
inspection, and yet capable of investigation to 
more philosophical and learned persons.] ’Av- 
ϑρώπῳ is not the object of λαλεῖν but is governed 
by ἐξόν. There are no means of determining 
whether Paul was brought to this conclusion by 
an express command with regard to it, or whether 
he saw its propriety without such a command. 
The speaker, however, must have been the Lord, 
comp. ver. 1, ἀποκ. κυρίου. What was said must 
have* been very significant and eminently 
strengthening to the Apostle’s mind (comp. Osi- 
ander).—Instead of proceeding to say now: ἐν 
τούτω (of such a thing) καυχήσομαι, as must have 
been in his mind, he says, in accordance with 
the mode of representation commenced in ver. 2. 
Of such a one will I glory (ver. 5).— 
Tov τοιούτου is not neuter but masculine. This 
is proved not only by ὑπέρ which has relation to 
a person in whose behalf the boasting must take 
place (chap. vii. 14, v. 12, viii. 24), but by the 
contrasted ἐμαυτοῦ, and the unmistakable refer- 
ence to τὸν τοιοῦτον in vers. 2 and 8.—The princi- 
ple which lies at the basis of the whole passage 
is, that he was not to boast of such revelations, 
as though they argued anything in his own fa- 
vor, but only as an incident connected with a man 
in Christ, who had been at this period completely 
lifted out of his own individuality and had been 
thought worthy of such grace merely on account 
of his being in Christ. His only object in con- 
descending to this boasting of such a one, was 
that he might bear witness that such glorious 
things had been granted to such a one.—But 
of myself I will not boast, save in my 
infirmities (ver. 5 b).—In behalf of himself, 
(regarded simply as himself), he would boast 


only with reference to his infirmities (comp. 


chap. xi. 30). He alluded here to those many 
manifestations of human weakness, which had 
occasioned so much humiliation to him, which 
had completely extirpated all vanity from his bo- 
som, and which had finally compelled him to 
boast only of that divine power which evinced its 
greatness through his infirmities, (comp. vv. 9, 
10.).—For if I shall desire to boast, I shall 
not be foolish, for I will speak the truth 
kek 6 a).—There is some dfficulty here in 

etermining the connection which the yep im- 
plies with ver. 5. To make it refer back to the 
first half of that verse, and thus to make the 
Apostle begin to reveal his identity with the man 
in Christ (Osiander) does not seem after all very 
probable. And yet to supply something to οὐ 
καυχήσομαι (ver. 5) by which it shall mean: I 
will not boast of these great revelations, and to 
make εἰ μή signify but only, and then in this ver. 
6 to make if I should desire to boast refer to the 
same things with the additional thought: al- 
though I could thus boast (De Wette), seems 
very harsh. We would prefer, without any such 
completion of the sense, to understand before 
the words οὐ καυχ. εἰ μῆ, etc., in ver. 5, simply: 
I could thus boast concerning myself if I wished 
to do 80 (7. ¢., of my worth and merits), and to 
suppose that when he continues, if I should de- 
sire, et¢., he is giving the reason for this thought 


which had sprung from what is obviously implied 
in the sentence itself (Meyer). But, perhaps after 
allit would be simpler to make the γάρ refer to the 
whole of ver. 6, so that the writer would have 
already in view the subsequent φείδομαι, and the 
sentence connected with it: I will not boast of 
myself except of my infirmities; for although I 
should not be a fool even if I were to boast my- 
self, inasmuch as I should tell the truth, yet I 
forbear, lest, ete. Or: not because I should be 
a fool, if I were inclined to boast myself, etc., but 
because I would guard against, etc. In this case 
there would be no need of adding anything to 
the thought expressed.—The boasting (καυχήσασ- 
Sat) has reference to something the reverse of 
weakness, and hence to deeds (comp. 1. Cor. xv. 
10) in which power was exhibited. In ἄφρων 
(senseless, without reason) he alludes probably to 
the empty boasting of his opponents, in which 
there was no basis of truth like that in his self- 
commendations—but I forbear, lest any one 
should reckon of me above what he 
sees me to be or hears from me (ver. 6b). 
—There is no need here of supplying ὑμῶν 
to φείδομαι; along with μή (or in the infinitive 
this verb has the sense of: to shrink back or to 
act with reserve, 7. 4. to deal sparingly with 
his self-commendation. In μῇ we have certainly 
the idea of mental care (MryeEr: of guarding 
against something). This anxiety, however, was 
well founded, so far as it referred to the inclina- 
tion to boast in men then so strong among the 
Corinthians, and the Apostle did not wish to en- 
courage in any way a disposition against which 
he had so earnestly contended. Tv¢ has reference 
to no particular individual, for we have no rea- 
son to suppose that he is here aiming at some 
Pauline party at Corinth. The over-valuation 
of his person which he here deprecates, he ex- 
presses in the words beyond what he sees me, or 
hears something from me (ὑπὲρ ὃ βλέπει με ἤ ἀκούει 
τι ἐξ ἐμοῦ) zt. 6., beyond the immediate impression 
which my personal presence would make. There 
is no necessity of supplying either εἶναι or ποιεῖν, 
after ὃ βλέπει με, which has reference to his 
whole appearance, his bearing and behavior. 
’Axovec refers to his performances in oral dis- 
course. Ἔξ ἐμοῦ (ex me) from myself, in con- 
trast with that which might be heard of him 
through others. Tc is a brachyological or concise 
form of expression equivalent to & Te ἀκούει. 
Notwithstanding the unfriendly opinions which 
had been expressed of him (chap. x. 1. 10), he 
desired to have no other standard laid down for 
judging of him than a strict conformity to what 
all might perceive in him. : 
Vers. 7-10. And lest Ishould be exalted 
above measure through the abundance of 
the revelations (ver. 7a).—[Stanley, adopting 
Lachmann’s reading of διὸ before iva, is obliged 
also with him, to connect καὶ τῇ ὑπερβ. τῶν ἀποκ. 
with ἀσϑενείαις in ver. 5, and to make the whole of 
ver. 6a parenthesis. Even Alford concedes that 
if διὸ forms a part of the text, it must be the 
commencement of a sentence, and that we must 
adopt Lachmann’s punctuation. But he thinks 
that ‘‘a very strange sense would thus be given,” 
for then the Apostle would refuse to glory in 
himself, except in his infirmities and in the ex- 
ceeding abundance of his revelations; thus making 


200 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





his glorying in his revelations a part of his glo- 
rying in himself. But rejecting διὸ, for which 
we have hardly sufficient authority, the sentence 
reads smoothly. Osiander remarks that every- 
thing in x. τῇ ὑπερβ. τῶν ἀποκ. 18 remarkable: the 
expression itself, the way in which the words are 
joined together, and the position of the words 
in the sentence. For emphasis the words are 
placed first (comp. chap. ii. 4), the revelations 
are represented as multifarious, and for addi- 
tional force a substantive is used with an adjec- 
tival signification.] Having said (vv. 5, 6) that 
he now abstained from further boasting, not be- 
cause he lacked in good grounds for it, but from 
a regard to them, that they might not overvalue 
his person, he now returns to the revelations he 
had spoken of in ver. 1, etc., and shows how he 
had been kept from a possible self-exaltation on 
account of these revelations, by means of a pecu- 
liarly severe affliction. Kai here signifies not: 
even, but: and, merely connecting with the for- 
mer sentence.—Y7epoAy occurs also in chap. iv. 
7. It is difficult to decide whether the dative is 
that of the instrument (: by means of), or of the 
cause (: on account of) like ἐπαίρεσϑαι τίνι. The 
meaning is much the same in either case. We 
have ὑπεραίρεσϑαι in 2 Thess. ii. 4, in the sense 
of to exalt himself.—There was given tomea 
thorn in the flesh, an angel of Satan 
to buffet me—There can be no doubt that 
a Divine intention or design is implied [by 
ἵνα], whether God or Satan is looked upon as 
the giver in ἐδόϑη. It is possible to interpret it 
of either, but it seems rather more appropriate 
to refer it to God, inasmuch as the object to be 
accomplished by it was under the Divine direc- 
tion. We must not, however, conclude from 
thence that ἐδόϑη implies merely a Divine per- 
mission, for it includes the idea of disposing, 
and ordaining. God gives even what is afflictive 
for the attainment of some higher and benevolent 
end; 7. 6. as the means of trial and humiliation. 
Σκόλοψ is a sharpened piece of wood, a stake, or 
a thorn (as in Numb. xxxiii. 55). The first of 
these meanings is not altogether inappropriate. 
[Stanley adheres to this, and contends that 
σκόλοψ is not a thorn (from which he finds it 
sometimes distinguished, esp. Hos. ii. 6; Sept. 
Artemid. iii. 833) but generally a pointed stake or 
palisade (Numb. xxx. 55; Ezek. xxviii. 24). It 
must be conceded that this is the usual meaning. 
Hence Luther and many understand by it a 
stake, for the execution of criminals. Stanley 
finds ἀνασκολοπίζω in the Sept. of Est. vii. 10 ex- 
plained by Phavorinus and Hesychius as equiva- 
lent to avacravpifw, and he thence infers that 
σκόλοψ was equivalent to σταυρός, the cross, or 
the stake. In Lucian, too (De morte Per. 11), 
ἀνασκολυπίζω is used for the crucifixion of Christ. 
As in describing his state of constant torture the 
Apostle draws his image from crucifixion, so here 
hedrawsitfrom impalement. The angel of Satan 
like Death in 1 Cor. xv. 55, is armed with the 
impaling stake; or the Apostle was himself al- 
ready impaled or crucified. The phrase τῇ σαρκὶ 
is certainly unsuitable to this interpretation]. 
In the flesh (τῇ σαρκὶ) is not in apposition with ¢o 
me (μοι) and dependent upon was given (ἐδόϑη), 
but it is to be connected with σκόλοψ (a thorn) as 
ἃ. dative of appropriation. But σάρξ is not hu- 


man nature‘in general, unregenerate and sin 
ful, but man’s corporeal nature with the sinful 
disposition connected with it. In this place 
it has reference especially to the sensitive hor- 
ror which that nature feels at pain, or its recoil] 
from the suffering which God had decreed for it. 
Σκόλοψ is undoubtedly the subject of ἐδόϑη, and 
ἄγγελος σατᾶν is in apposition to σκόλοψ, though 
the converse of this may not be true (as if σκόλοψ 
were an dyyedoc.). These words in apposition, 
however, are the subject of ἵνα---κολαφίζη, which 
involves a metaphor no longer quite suitable to 
σκόλοψ. But such an apparent irregularity of 
construction may be found in other places. And 
yet there is no inversion of the words, as if he 
would say: that the angel of Satan might buffet me. 
Κολαφίζῃ expresses continued action and it is 
therefore in the subj. pres. not in the aorist. 
"Ayyedoc σατᾶν does not signify merely a hostile 
angel, for σατᾶν never is to be found precisely 
as an adjective, and in the New Testament it 
never has the sense of adversarius (an angel, an 
adversary). Nor can it mean Satan himself [the 
angel Satan] who is never designated an ἄγγελος: 
but an angel of Satan like ἄγγελοι τοῦ διαβόλου in 
Matt. xxv. 41. Σατᾶν therefore is in the geni- 
tive (the var. σατανᾶ has less authority for it, is 
a correction of the indeclinable noun, which isa 
ἅπαξ λεγόμενον). An exceedingly painful suffer- 
ing is indicated by σκόλοψ, and is described by 
the phrase an angel of Satan. It is not merely 
a suffering sent upon the Apostle by Satan, (for 
Satan’s angel in the estimation of the Apostle 
was a real malignant power) by means of which 
God had ordained for him a humiliating torment 
(comp. 1 Cor. v. 5, Job ii. 6), with the exalted 
purpose which he afterwards brings forward in 
an emphatic manner when he says:—lest I 
should be exalted above measure (ver. pit 
—The idea conveyed therefore is, that in accord- 
ance with the divine decree the Apostle was 
abased in a humiliating manner by an angel of 
Satan, and that in consequence of this torment- 
ing influence sent on him from the kingdom of 
darkness, he was kept from unduly exalting him- 
self on account of the glorious revelations vouch- 
safed him from the kingdom of light. But of 
what nature were these sufferings? Of course 
we are not to think of literal and real blows or 
buffetings. The idea of an internal assault of 
Satan by means of blasphemous thoughts, or by 
remorse of conscience on account of his earlier 
persecution of the followers of Christ, or by 
means of temptations to lust, must be regarded 
(irrespective of the last mentioned suggestion, 
which was an improbable product of the ascetic 
exegesis of the monks, comp. Osiander p. 473 
and chap. iv. 7), as directly in opposition to τῇ 
σαρκί (according to Meyer also in opposition to 
σκόλοψ and κολαφίζη in which are described an 
acute and continuous pain). Still more impro- 
bable is the idea of external assaults on the part 
of hostile opponents, called here ministers of Sa- 
tan (chap. xi. 15), and designated collectively an 
angel of Satan, inasmuch as one of them (sing.) 
may have distinguished himself above the rest; 
or the idea of a great pressure of apostolic du- 
ties in general. The context leads us to think 
of a definite and special form of suffering 
(Meyer) in contrast with the abundance of the 


CHAP. XII. 1-18, 





revelations, and of something for whose cessa- 
tion he could properly and earnestly pray (ver. 
8), as he could hardly do with respect to his of- 
ficial duties.—The most probable supposition is 
that he had in view some very severe and painful 
bodily suffering, which however did not prevent 
his undergoing exhausting labors and his per- 
sisting in numerous hardships. But it is utterly 
out of our power to determine precisely what 
this suffering consisted in (hemorrhoids, hypo- 
condria and melancholy, epilepsy, stone, violent 
head-ache, etc.). Ewaip: ‘When this disease 
came upon him, it was like a terrific blow upon 
the head (xoAagif7) without a previous warning.” 
It was something personal, not affecting him sim- 
ply as a minister of Christ, and an ἀσϑένεια (ver. 
9), although of a peculiar kind, reminding him 
of his human frailty and hence having a ten- 
dency to keep him from undue self-exaltation 
on account of his remarkable experiences of .di- 
vine favor. We are very naturally reminded of 
Luther’s disease of the stone which in like man- 
ner was ascribed to the devil. Osiander unites 
together the ideas of bodily and spiritual as- 
saults, and his explanation is favored by the fact 
that there is usually a reciprocal action between 
the two, but the general impression of our pas- 
sage is rather in favor of a long-continued evil 
rather than of a temporary darkening and dis- 
turbance of mind.—In vv. 8, 9, he tells us how 
he prayed that this evil and its consequences 
might be removed from him.— Concerning 
this, I besought the Lord thrice, that he 
might depart from me (ver. 8).—'Y7zép, since 
Demosthenes, has frequently had the sense of περί: 
in consideration of, in respect to. Τούτου is not 
neuter but masculine, as is shown by ἀποστῇ 
(might depart). He had in his mind the angel 
of Satan. Τρίς is not equivalent to πολλάκις, nor 
is it a number for perfection. There may have 
been long intervals of time between each prayer, 
and perhaps he only prayed when under extreme 
paroxysms of suffering. That he was under this 
affliction when he wrote however, is not neces- 
sarily implied. He received no answer from the 
Lord until the third petition, when, of course, he 
ceased. The Lord (κύριος) is Christ who has ob- 
tained the victory over every kind of Satanic 
power. Παρακαλεῖν isa word which in the New 
Testament is never used with reference to God 
and only with reference to Christ. It has the 
sense of, fo call for help, and in the classic writers 
is used to designate a call on the gods. ’Azo- 
στῆναι (to depart) as in Luke iv. 13 is used with 
regard to Satan, but in Acts v. 38, and xrii. 29, 
it is applied to human assailants. And he has 
said unto me, My grace is sufficient for 
thee, for power is made perfect in weak- 
ness (ver. 9).—In this place εἴρηκε express a con- 
tinued action [the perfect of a continued past 
action], but we have no means of determining 
how it was said, whether in a vision, or merely 
by some internal encouragement. (OsIANDER: 
‘‘probably a testimony of the Holy Spirit in the 
exercise of the highest spiritual functions, by 
means of which the Apostle’s heart was tho- 
roughly tranquilized, assured of his gracious state 
and enlightened with respect to this special case. 
It was thus a distinct revelation of the mind 
ef Christ, by special inspiration, and confirmed, 


201 





perhaps, by the application of some passage of 
Scripture.” The answer was an apparent re- 
fusal, witm such a promise as was a virtual 
granting of his request. The ἀρκεῖ, which stands 
for emphasis at the head of the sentence, is not 
equivalent to: will protect (a poetical usage), or 
will assist (Xenophon and others), but it means 
simply, will be sufficient for, will satisfy; it will be 
enough that I am gracious to thee, and that I 
love thee, and will take pleasure in thee. There 
is no reference to miraculous gifts. To show 
that he would need nothing else, the Lord adds: 
for my strength, etc. The μου has only a few au- 
thorities in its favor, but they are of the highest 
importance; and even if it is not supplied in the 
text, it must be understood. The fact that ἐν 
ἀσϑενείᾳ has no cov after it may have had some in- 
fluence in inducing transcribers to leave it out. 
The meaning is: with one who is in this weak 
state, my power comes into more perfect acti-- 
vity (comp. chap. iv. 7; 1 Cor. ii. 8, 4). But this: 
power of the Lord dwells only in those who» 
share also in His grace; ἡ. ¢., it is put forth in» 
its full strength and activity only where there iss 
nothing but helplessness and painful weakness ;- 
for where a consciousness of power is, it is ra-- 
ther impeded in its action. (Τελεῖται has not the: 
sense of: ‘proves itself to be perfect).—Most- 
gladly, therefore, will I rather glory in 
my infirmities, that Christ’s power may- 
abide upon me—(ver. 9).—The Apostle: 
here describes the effect of this promise. He: 
gave up all expectation of being freed from his 
trouble, and he was satisfied with the prospect’ 
of enjoying the grace whose work was to be com-.. 
pleted in his weakness. Grammatical usage will 
not permit us to refer μᾶλλον to ἥδιστα. Nor: 
should we supply after it: than before, when I 
prayed thus (ver. 8), or: than any thing, or: 
than in my own power, or: than in the revela- 
tions which I had. It belongs rather, as its po- 
sition necessarily shows, to καυχήσομαι. Instead 
of complaining and praying that the suffering 
might cease, 1 will rather glory in my infirmi- 
ties. This, however, would lead to the accom- 
plishment and experience of the promise given 
him when the Lord visited him, z. 6., that Christ’s 
power might dwell (permanently abide) upon 
him. The word ἐπισκηνοῦν signifies to enter, to: 
turn into, a tent or dwelling. ’E7’ ἐμέ, in other 
places, has reference to the direction generally; 
and here, where the Apostle is speaking of the- 
power of Christ, who was then in heaven, it~ 
means, to come down upon me and to abide with 
me (the figure is that of ἃ permanent connection). 
Whether any thing of unusual solemnity attaches - 
to the expression, as if it had reference to the: 
Shekinah, as if the power of Christ were as a. 
pavilion extended over him for his protection, or- 
as if he himself were the space in which it was to- 
be manifested, is uncertain ——Wherefore I 
am well contented in infirmities, in re- 
proaches, in necessities, in persecutions, 
in distresses for Christ’ssake (ver. 10). From. 
what he had just described as the object of all 
this proceeding, and of course from the promise. 
of Christ which had been accomplished by his 
glorying in his infirmities (ver. 9), the Apostle 
now makes a practical inference, viz.: inasmuch 
as this glorying in my infirmities has brought 


202 





Christ’s power to take possession of me, I take 
pleasure in infirmities, etc. ’Evdoxety ἐν signifies 
here a voluntary endurance, a patient satisfaction 
with these sufferings. [Our English A. V.: take 
pleasure in, is too strong ; the Greek is: J am well 
contented in (Fausset)]. The ἀσϑένειαι, the suf- 
fering condition in which these infirmities be- 
come perceptible, are particularized in ὕβρεσιν, 
insulting abuses, ἀνάγκαις, etc., comp. chap. vi. 4 
(external afflictions proceeding from those around 
him). ’Yzép χριστοῦ, which belongs to and qua- 
lifies all these preceding nouns, signifies here: 
for the sake (or, in behalf) of Christ. —FPor when 
Iam weak, then am I strong (ver. 103.). 
The reason for his good courage while enduring 
these sufferings for Christ’s sake, was that he 
had felt strengthened under all his infirmities by 
the power of Christ dwelling continually in him 
(comp. Phil. iv. 18). In these words we have 
the fulfilment of the promise in ver. 9. Τότε is 
emphatic, and shows how triumphant were the 
Apostle’s feelings, comp. 1 Cor. xv. 54; Col. 
iii. 4, 

[Srantey: ‘The long burst of passionate self- 
vindication, has now, at last expended itself, and 
the Apostle returns to the point from whence he 
diverged at chap. x. 7, where he was asserting 
his intention to repress the disobedience of those 
who still resisted his authority at Corinth. Be- 
fore, however, he enters again upon this, he 
looks back over the long digression, and resumes 
here and there a thought which needed explana- 
tion or expansion. Hence, although this con- 
cluding section stands apart from the interrup- 
tion of chap. x. 10—xii. 10, and is truly the 
winding up of the main argument begun in chap. 
x. 1-7, it is filled with traces of the torrent which 
has passed through his mind in the interval. 
His ‘folly,’ chap. xi. 1-10; the ‘commendatory 
epistles’ (chap. iii. 1; v. 12); the ‘apostolical’ 
pretensions of his opponents (chap. xi. 12, 13) 
are resumed in yer. 11; his miracles and suffer- 
ings (chap. xi. 23-28), in ver. 12; the question 
of self-support (chap. xi. 12) in vv. 13-18; the 
‘strength and weakness united in Christ (chap. 
xii. 19), in chap. xiii. 8, 4, 9; 

Vers. 11-15.—Iam becomea fool; ye have 
‘compelled me: for I ought to have been 
commended by you; for in nothing was 
I behind these overmuch apostles, al- 
‘though I am nothing (ver. 11).—He here 
makes an ironical concession (for the words should 
not be regarded as a question) with reference to 
the many things he had said in commendation of 
himself in the course of the last two chapters: J 
am become a fool. [The verb γέγονα indicates that 
he had become what he was not originally]. And 
yet he follows this immediately with a justifica- 
‘tion of himself; for he throws upon them the 
responsibility of all: ye have forced me thus 
foolishly to boast myself, for I ought to have 
been commended by you, instead of being obliged 
to commend myself. [The ironical nature of the 
passage explains the concession without taking 
this verse interrogatively, as Wordsworth, after 
‘some Greek scholiasts, suggests]. In emphatic 
‘correspondence with one another are arranged 
the words: ὑμεῖς, ἐγώ, ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν. By éyw he does 
not put himself in special contrast with those 
‘opponents who were so highly commended by 


a eS SE ee EE ES Ee Se See 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
πιὸ eee NE Oe ENE 


the Corinthians. He merely censures here the 
want of attention which these Corinthians had 
shown to his claims. Their positive injustice 
toward him he exposes when he comes to say, 
that he had been in no respect behind those 
much-lauded apostles (comp. xi. 5). ὝὙστέρησα 
limits the time of the comparison to the period 
of his residence at Corinth. With humility, how- 
ever, he adds (comp. 1 Cor. xv, 8, etc.), that he 
was after all nothing, ὁ. 6., 1am absolutely power- 
less in myself (1 Cor. i. 28). This is a sincere 
assertion, though it contains a severe allusion 
to the pride of his opponents (Osiander). He 
shows that he wasin no respect behind these super- 
eminent apostles, by referring to those proofs of: 
his Apostleship which he had given among them. 
—Truly the signs of an Apostle were 
wrought among you in all patience by 
signs and wonders and miracles (ver. 12). 
The signs of an Apostle here signify those things 
by means of which the Apostles showed that they 
were Apostles, and were recognized as such amon 
their fellow men. The article makes the idea o 
an Apostle especially prominent (BENGEL: ¢us, 
qui sit apostolus); the reality and not merely the 
ideal of one. The first σημεία is here to be taken 
in the more comprehensive sense [of general evi-~ 
dences], whereas the second should be explained. 
in the narrower signification [of special tokens 
of a Divine power]. Nveanper: “Our faith in 
the reality of the Apostle’s performance of mir- 
acles need not therefore be founded solely upon 
tradition, for Paul here asserts that he wrought 
them, and he thus comes in direct opposition to 
all mythical views of the narratives of New Tes- 
tament miracles.”’ The passive κατηργάσϑη (were 
wrought) or κατειργάσϑη is a modest form of 
expression for: I wrought. Even if we are not 
influenced by the inappropriateness of such an 
idea ἐν πάσῃ ὑπομονῇ cannot be taken as the first 
in the series of σημείοις, etc., for the ἐν is not 
really a part of the original text. The phrase 
designates the ethical element in which these 
signs were wrought in Corinth (ἐν ὑμῖν), and 
which had a tendency to confirm believers there. 
It shows his perseverance, with all steadfastness 
in the midst of the opposition and sufferings he 
had to meet as an Apostle (comp. chap. vi. 4).. 
'Yrouovf has reference here not to an outward 
objective tolerance of all kinds of evils (for it has © 
no genitive of the object in connection with it, 
as in chap. i. 6), but it refers to the feelings with 
which he persevered under his trials. Πάσῃ 
implies the degree, the completeness of his pa- 
tience, for if we refer it to the extent to which it 
was carried in respect to the variety of its ex- 
ercises, it would more properly apply to the 
objective interpretation. These proofs of his 
Apostleship (κατεργ. is said of that which is a 
res ardua) he calls onreia, τεράτα, δυναμξις. The 
words designate the same thing under various 
aspects; we have: 1, their significance, with re- 
ference to the Divine legation; 2, their impres- 
sion, on account of their extraordinary and won- 
derful appearance; 3, their causality, as expres- 
sions of Divine power. [Σημεῖα are * signs,” 
and have an ethical purpose beyond themselves 
as credentials of a Divine mission; τέρατα are 
‘‘wonders,” regarded simply as supernatural pro- 
digies to excite surprise, and are never spoken 


CHAP. XII. 1-18. 


203 





of except in connection with some of the other 
names; and δυναμεῖς are ‘‘ mighty works,” looked 
upon simply as putting forth of Divine power. 
See Trencu, part 2, p. 198ff.; Wessrer, 233f. It 
is much to be regretted that each of these words 
in the original is not rendered in our English 
version uniformly by the same word]. The 
same words are used in 2 Thess. ii. 9 (of Satanic 
miracles), but in Heb. ii. 4 and in Rom. xv. 19, 
they are referred to for the same purpose as in 
our passage, 7 ¢., to legitimate Apostolical 
authority. The accumulation of such words 
brings into more distinct prominence the magni- 
tude and variety of the miracles. Some have 
attempted, rather arbitrarily, to refer the first 
to the cure of diseases which were curable by 
ordinary means; the second, to the cure of dis- 
eases beyond the reach of human art; and the 
third, to exercises of Apostolical power in pun- 
ishing crimes, or to spiritual powers. The force 
of the passage is entirely lost by those who ex- 
plain it of the extraordinary effects produced by 
his preaching and character. The μέν gives a! 
hint of a contrast, on which the Apostle is other- 
wise silent, 7. ¢., the want of acknowledgment 
which these signs had suffered. Meyer: the 
proofs were indeed (truly) wrought, but they have 
failed to produce the corresponding conviction 
among you. There is no γάρ in the sentence, and 
the omission is in accordance with the abrupt and 
lively style of the general passage. It is, however, 
supplied in ver. 13, where he corroborates by a 
touching question what he had said in ver. 12.— 
For what is there in which ye were in- 
ferior to the rest of the churches? (ver. 
13a).—The proofs of an Apostleship had been 
wrought among them, for in nothing were they 
inferior to the other churches where he had la- 
bored. ὝὙπέρ signifies generally over, beyond; 
but here on account of ἡττᾶσϑαι, downwards, be- 
low. In other places -we have ἠττᾶσϑαι τινός 
τινι (but with the accus. of the ‘“wherein”’). 
‘Rickert, very incorrectly and contrary to the 
conuection with ver. 12, gives the meaning: ye 
have suffered no more injury than, etc. It seems 
also an arbitrary limitation of the thought, to 
make it refer exclusively to the gifts of the Spi- 
rit.—The Apostle, however, allows that there 
was one respectin which they might be considered 
inferior:—except that I myself was not 
burdensome to you (ver. 134); ὁ. 6. hadlabored 
among them without compensation. This was a 
delicate though painful irony, which amounted 
to bitterness when he added the prayer which 
follows. Ei μὴ ὅτε: 7. 6. except perhaps; or: except 
this, that, ete. The great distance of ver. 16, etc., 
renders it improper to explain αὐτὸς ἐγώ by a re- 
ference to it. [Αὐτὸς is very emphatic especially 
before ἐγὼ]. He places his own person in con- 
trast with those Apostolic works to which his 
question had just alluded. Οὐ κατενάρκησα is ex- 
plained on chap. xi. 7, 8.—This fact that he had 
received no personal maintenance from them as 
he had done from other churches, made them in- 
ferior to those churches and was an injustice to 
them, for which he craved their pardon :—for- 
give me this wrong (ver. 13c).—Such a 
request was a severe censure, as if they had been 
so ungrateful and had so completely failed to 
appreciate his conduct, that they had become 


grossly prejudiced against him through the in- 
fluence of his contemptuous and suspicious op- 
ponents.—Chrysostom and some others contend 
that the Apostle was not here speaking ironically, 
but that he was endeavoring to mitigate the 
wounded feeling he had produced by his allusion 
to his self-denying course among them (as if it 
were a sign of a defect in his regard for them). 
But the irony of the preceding question compels 
us to regard the prayer as a continuation of the 
same strain.—Not until he comes to ver. 14, does 
he come back. to his ordinary tone:—Behold, 
I'am ready to come unto you the third 
time, and I will not be burdensome toyou. 
—lIn this verse τρίτον does not belong to ἑτοίμως 
ἔχω but to éAvéw πρὸς ὑμᾶς, for it is not with re- 
ference to his readiness, but to his actual coming 
among them that he could say he was. resolved 
not to be burdensome to them. He intended to 
say that on two occasions when he had been 
among them [see on chap. xiii. 1], he had not 
been a burden to them and he was equally re- 
solved not to be a burden to them on this third 
visit for which he was now prepared. On ἰδοῦ 
comp. chap. vi. 2, 9; vii. 11.—His reason for 
this purpose he says was to be found in his dis- 
interested love for them (comp. Phil. iv. 17); 
they were of importance to him, not because of 
what they possessed, and hence not for any advan- 
tage they would be to him, but for their own sakes; 
since if they were won to Christ and advanced in 
the work of salvation, he would gain by them as 
much as he desired (Riickert reverses this: the 
Apostle would gain them for himself, and in this 
way for Christ; but such a view is not as much ac- 
cording to the spirit of the passage, comp. Osian- 
der).—This idea he traces back to the natural 
relation between parents and children; by virtue 
of which children were not bound to make provi- 
sion for the parents, but the parents for the chil- 
dren:—For the children are not bound to 
lay up for the parents, but the parents for 
the children (ver. 14).—This applied to him 
as their spiritual father (1 Cor. iv. 15), and it 
was therefore his part not to seek for their pos- 
sessions, but to care for them and to collect spi- 
ritual treasures for them (as the duty of providing 
for children by the investment of property is not 
abolished but brought within the proper limits 
of a confidence in God and a heavenly mind by 
what is said in Matth. vi. 19, so here the duty 
of children to support their parents is not ex- 
cluded, Osiander). After οἱ γονεῖς understand 
ὀφείλουσι ϑησαυρίζειν.---Ἠ6 applies this rule to 
himself in ver. 15, but he implies that his love 
was strong enough to go far beyond the limits 
usually reached by parental duty:—And I will 
most gladly spend and be spent for you. 
—The gradual rise in the discourse or the climax 
indicated by dé is clearly brought out even in 
ἥδιστα, which goes far beyond ὀψείλει, but it is 
carried far beyond both in ἐκδαπανηϑήσομαι. In- 
stead of collecting something for himself at their 
expense, he was determined not merely to ex- 
pend with hearty good will, all that he had ac- 
quired or possessed, for their benefit, but so to 
use all his powers as to wear them out in the in- 
terest of their souls, 7. ¢., to sacrifice his life and 
his whole self, if he could thereby promote their 
supreme good. The compound verb ἐκδαπανᾶς- 


204 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


en need EEE yEyEaEE ESSE 


Ya: is much stronger than the original simple 
verb, and signifies to be utterly consumed (comp. 
Osiander’s admirable remarks). The Apostle 
adds:—although the more abundantly I 
love you, the less I am loved. (ver. 15d) 
—If we accept εἰ καί according to the Receptus, 
the sense would be: although I shall be loved 
the less, the more I love you. Riickert and 
Osiander preserve this idea, even if καί is 
rejected (making εἰ concessive), but such an 
interpretation is very doubtful. Meyer takes 
εἰ in the sense of: if, equivalent to ἐπεί, as 
if the Apostle hesitated to make the direct 
and confident assertion, but declared that he 
was willing to go to the utmost in overcoming 
their hostile spirit toward him. This willingness 
he would still express if the condition were set 
forth as an actual and known fact: though I, as 
is now evident, shall be loved the less, ete. If 
this is presented by the Apostle as the motive of 
his conduct the language certainly is very severe, 
but on any other view the idea comes out in a 
very awkward and feeble manner. It is better 
probably to take it in a convessive sense, but 
then it becomes necessary with Tischendorf to 
retain the καί, which has many and good autho- 
rities in its favor.—Ilepscoorepwo—yrrov is an ab- 
breviated expression for 60—rooiT~.—Nothing 
needs to be understood in addition to the compa- 
rative (as: more than other churches, or: less than 
my opponents). 

Vers. 16-18. He here meets the attempt to 
throw on him the suspicion that under the pre- 
tence of personal disinterestedness he had sent 
deputies, and through them had imposed burdens 
upon the Corinthians. He comes upon his read- 
ers boldly and confidently with the question 
whether these deputies had not exhibited a disin- 
terestedness similar to his own.—But be it 
50, I was not burdensome to you; ne- 
vertheless, being crafty, I caught you 
with guile (ver. 16). In ἔστω, etc., he puts 
himself in the position of an objector. Such 
a one must concede that the Corinthians had 
not been burdened with any selfish claims on his 
part, but it might be insinuated that this had 
been only to play a deeper game of craft to get 
them into his power, and to overreach them by 
means of his emissaries. Εστω is found with a 
similar use in Plato, as inthe Latin: esto! sit ita 
sane! ᾿Εγώ is here emphatic in contrast with 
those intermediate agents mentioned in vers. 17-- 
18. With ἀλλά he introduces the precise objecti6n 
(in contrast with ἐστω---ὑμᾶς): he had caught 
them by a crafty method gaining them over by 
an appearance of disinterestedness (ἔλαβον is 
found in. chap. xi. 20). Πανοῦργος signifies 
adroit, sly, subtle (chap. iv. 2; xi. 3). Paul’s 
real prudence and skill was here represented in 
an unfavorable light (comp. Osiander). Ὕπάρχων 
is used in a similar manner in 1 Cor. xi. 7.— 
Did I make a gain of you by any of them 
whom I sent unto you (ver. 17). This 
verse is an anacoluthon; where τινὰ is in an 
emphatic position at the commencement of the 
sentence, and as an accusative absolute. He was 
probably about to write: ἀπέσταλκα εἰς τὸ πλε- 
ονεκτῆσαι ὑμᾶς, but with an impressive abbrevia- 
tion, he leaves this second ἀπέσταλκα out, and, 
losing sight of the accus.: τινὰ, writes: d¢ ἀυτοῦ 


ἐπλεονεκτησα. The ὧν is here an instance of at- 
traction for τούτων ov¢.—I besought Titus to 
go on this mission, and with Him I 
sent the brother (ver. 18 a). He here 
names these deputies, and especially Titus, whom 
he had sent last, and the brother [not a brother, 
as in our English A. V.] accompanying Titus, 
unnamed, but well known to his readers. It is 
impossible for us to determine who this brother 
was, Weconclude from the word συναπέστειλα, 
and from the fact that only Titus is afterwards 
named, that he was subordinate to Titus. The 
sending is the one mentioned in chap. vii. [soon 
after the writing of the first Epistle of our canon] 
and not that spoken of in chap. viii. On 
παρεκάλεσα comp. chap..viii. 6, 17. [Osiander 
draws attention to the fact that in each of the 
three passages (chap. vii. 13; viii. 6) in which 
Paul’s agency in inducing Titus to enter upon 
this mission, the same word (zapaxaAéw) is used. 
The word appears to convey an idea intermedi- 
ate between ‘that of a command and that of a 
prayer, ἢ, e., a friendly requirement, a reminding 
of what- ought to be done|.—Did Titus make 
again of you? Walked we not in the 
same spiritand in the same steps? (ver. 18). 
Tw αὐτῷ πνεύματι is the dative of the mode and 
manner (Rom. xiii. 18), or of the rule orlaw. The 
meaning is: did not the same Holy Spirit control 
us all in our conduct, and keep us from all selfish 
conduct, from every thing like making a gain of 
any one? The dative ov τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἴχνεσιν is 
probably the local dative, as in Acts xiv. 16, and 
the words here signify an agreement in external 
conduct, as the preceding clause refers to an 
agreement in internal purpose and feeling. The 
Apostle is not here speaking directly of Christ’s 
footsteps (1 Pet. ii. 21), but we must conclude 
that they walked in the same steps, because Ti- 
tus followed those of Paul (Meyer). 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. When a Christian is distinguished for re- 
markable degrees of Divine grace, he is very apt 
to become elevated in his own estimation. A 
faithful God not unfrequently prevents this by 
bringing him into cireumstances of deep humi- 
liation, that by such painful methods he may be-. 
come conscious of his own inability, and that he 
may not claim those glorious distinctions which 
are given him for Christ’s sake, as if they were 
his own and were intended for his personal ho- 
nor. In all such afflictions, whether bodily or 
spiritual, or both combined, there is an influence 
of Satan designed to torment and worry him, but 
God will use them to drive him to the throne of 
grace. And though his ardent request to be 
freed from the distress may not be granted, he 
will surely receive that Divine grace which will 
enable him to bear the heaviest burden. Divine 
power will find its best sphere of activity in his 
weakness, and the result will be that he will be 
strong in his weakness. Instead, therefore, of 
complaining and fretting about his various infir- 
mities and those sufferings which make him 
conscious of them, he will experience and exhi- 
bit to the world no small degree of satisfaction in 
them. 

2. A faithful member of Christ will be inclined 


CHAP. XII. 1-18. 


to keep his own person in the background, 
wherever he is. He seeks no honor for himself, 
and least of all will he boast himself when he 
gains esteem and influence in consequence of 
some special impartations of grace from on high. 
Every attempt to give him an undue importance 
on account of such things will be offensive to 
him, because it will seem like giving him an ho- 
nor which belongs only to God. He desires to 
be esteemed only for what he has actually done 
and spoken. The important thing with him is 
not the fleece, but the sheep, that those souls 
which Christ has purchased may be brought to 
Him and be saved. For such an object he is 
willing to make any sacrifice, to bring to the al- 
tar all that he is and has, even his life. What if 
men do not appreciate his love and fidelity, make 
him no suitable return, and even showthemselves 
ungrateful? His love will only become more 
ardent, and his devotion to their welfare more 
intense. 

ὃ. W. F. Bessrer:—Ever since God stationed 
before Eden the cherub with his naked, flaming 
sword, man must look for no Paradise on earth. 
There is, however, one beyond this sinful world 
in the third heaven. Its treasures and its jewels 
were enjoyed by the Apostle when in holy ecstasy 
he was allowed to have direct communion with 
God in Christ, that true tree of life which was 
lost in Adam but regained in Christ. Our Lord 
promised it to the thief on the cross (Luke xxiii. 
43), and now offers it to all sinners. When the 
tabernacle of God shall be pitched upon the new 
earth, then shall the New Jerusalem be revealed 
in Paradisaic glory (Rev. xxi. 2, 3). 

[3. ‘*Paul evidently supposed that his soul 
might be taken to heaven without the body, and 
that it might have a separate consciousness and 
@ separate existence. He was not therefore a 
materialist, and he did not believe that the ex- 
istence and consciousness of the soul was de- 
pendent on the body” (Barnes). Doddridge 
says that he has ‘‘yet to learn what the presence 
of an immaterial soul in a body can be (for this 
also seems supposed by the Apostle to be a pos- 
sibility), distinct from the capacity of perceiving 
by it, and acting uponit.’’ And yet the Apostle 
makes both suppositions and evidently regarded 
them as credible. 

4. All prayer is answered in heaven—though 
sometimes not until it becomes importunate, and 
the petitioner has come by continued prayerful 
fellowship with God to a consciousness of his real 
want. Paul (like his Master) prayed and held 
communion with his Lord, until he came to know 
what was possible and best for him. The sub- 
ject matter of his prayer, as it existed in the 
heart, was for relief, rather than for that specific 
mode of relief which the outward words asked 
for. That prayer in the heart was answered 
when his thorn ceased to be a thorn to him. 

5. It is lawful to address Christ in prayer. 
Though the verb παρακαλέω is never used in 
classic Greek, nor in any other passage of the 
N. T., as equivalent to δέομαι, and in an address 
to God, the reason for its preference here was 
probably simply because of the familiar and 
personal relation in which Paul supposes him- 
self to his Lord. The distinction between invo- 
catio and advocatio seems here inappropriate, 


205 





since Christ is evidently not addressed as an ad- 
vocate with the Father, as if He were subordi- 
nate, but as a supreme and ultimate Disposer of 
affairs. 

6. We have here (ver. 12) one of the few allu- 
sions which the Apostles make in their Epistles 
to the evidence of miracles. Only in seven out 
of all their Epistles is any thing said of this 
kind of evidence, and the reason is that most of 
those Epistles are hortatory and not apologetical. 
Here, however, the importance, if not the indis- 
pensable necessity of miracles, as σημεῖα τ. ἀποσ- 
τόλου is clearly asserted. And yet here, as 
every where else, they are spoken of in an unob- 
trusive manner as of universally acknowledged 
facts. They had been performed, as Christ 
wrought them, not merely as credentials of a Di- 
vine mission, but from benevolence also, and 
from a fulness of power to relieve human woe. 
And yet in another aspect they were, and might 
properly be, appealed to as the seals of the 
Apostleship. Comp. Fausset, Port. Com.]. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Curysostom:—VEr. 10. Where there is suf- 
fering there is consolation, and where there is 
consolation there is grace. And yet before the 
reward which God bestows, we derive much be- 
nefit from the very exercises of affliction itself; 
for our arrogance is repressed, our littleness is 
taken away, the use we can make of many hu- 
man instruments is discovered, and we are, as it 
were, anointed for the conflicts before us.— 
Basit:—Ver. 18. The left hand is not more in- 
dispensable to the right, than unanimity and 
concord to the ministers of the church. 

Srarke:—Ver. 1. Never boast of yourself; 
it is always useless and vain. But if you so 
conduct yourself that others praise you, it is ho- 
norable and useful to you (Prov. xxvii. 2)—Ver. 
2ff. Spener:—While under such Divine influ- 
ences, ecstasies and revelations, the external man 
cannot pay attention to itself, and frequently it 
has no conception of what is passing within it- 
self; all power and intelligence is taken up with 
what is taking place within the soul itself. 
While the eternal God is at work within him, 
the man knows nothing of time, and while God’s 
power occupies his thoughts, he has no remem- 
brance of such a thing as himself or the world. 
Hepincer:—During the present life, heaven- 
ly things are much too high and difficult, and 
it is enough if we can be gradually prepared for 
them by a few fortastes of them.—Ver. 5. Our 
highest boast now is, to know what weak, poor 
and miserable creatures we are. Whatever good 
we are and have, is entirely the result of God's 
grace and mercy.—Ver. 6. Hepincer:—A faith- 
ful pastor will be careful that his people think 
of him no more highly than they ought to think. 
Ver. 7. Where much is given, much also shall 
we be tempted; but great also shall be our con- 
solation and sure our final victory.—Let no one 
pride himself on anything he has received from 
God, for as sure as he does go, all enjoyment of 
it will be taken away from his flesh by some 
keen thorn, which Satan knows how to sharpen 
so ingeniously that he will be compelled to feel 
it whether he is willing or unwilling.—Ver. 8. 


206 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, 


ng 


Affliction drives us to God, and teaches us to call 
on him day and night, Isa. xxvi. 16. But very 
probably God will make us wait, Ps. cxxx. 6. 
Christians gain their victories by patience and 
prayer. Prayer makes the heart light and 
merry. If you cannot pray, then groan, and if 
you cannot groan and even this distresses you, 
that very distress is a prayer, Rom. viii. 26.— 
Ver. 9, LurHer:—Christ cannot make known His 
full strength in us, until we are weak and suf- 
fering. God knows best what is for our good; 
and no one is more ignorant on this point than 
those who are enduring the anguish of the cross. 
Our prayers, therefore, should always be condi- 
tional. Think not that it is a sign of God’s dis- 
pleasure, when you are not heard according to 
your desire, even though you have prayed 
aright, for it is rather a token of grace. Happy 
the man whois so satisfied with Divine grace, that 
it is easy for him to depend wholly upon God; 
for he who is thus satisfied with grace actually 
enjoys it. Our weakness need never trouble us. 
The weaker we are in ourselves, the stronger in 
Christ, Ps. xviii. 86. It is the weak tendril 
which unites the branch with the vine. Christ 
is our vine. We who are truly in Christ shall 
never fall, whatever storms may beat upon us. 
If we have much grace, we must have much suf- 
fering; if great suffering, great power; and if 
great power, great victory. All these hang to- 
gether in one undivided chain.—Ver. 10, Hrv- 
INGER:—The more humbled by afflictions, the 
more exalted by grace. Faith increases under 
conflicts. —Ver. 11. Pious Christians should never 
remain silent when men venture by falsehoods 
to cast suspicion upon their spiritual teachers. 
Such is the duty of every Christian in behalf of 
his fellow men, how much more of spiritual 
children in behalf of their parents. Humility 
forbids us not to allow others to commend us, 
but only to love the praise of men. The more 
thou humblest thyself, the more exalted thou art, 
and the more God will be gracious to thee, 
Eccles. iii. 20.—Ver. 12. The signs of a true ser- 
vant of Christ are seen not merely in his passive 
suffering, but in his active doings.—Ver. 13. 
Srener:—Without keeping back what they owe 
to God and their fellow men, parents should 
economize what God has kindly bestowed upon 
them, that their children may have something 
after their death; but let them be careful to lay 
up no treasures from mere coyetousness, from a 
distrust of Providence, to the prejudice of the 
claims of justice, and to the withholding of what 
is due to the honor of God, their neighbor’s ne- 
cessity, or the proper education of their chil- 
dren. By not attending to these latter conside- 
rations, many live to experience much anguish 
of heart, and drown themselves and their chil- 
dren in everlasting destruction (comp. Matth. vi. 
19; 1 Tim. vi. 9). Happy the church in which 
many are serving the Lord, and all are faithful! 
—Ver. 18. It is a great blessing, where God’s 
servants are ruled and animated by the Spirit of 
Christ alone, and where they all walk in the 
same steps. 

Bertens Breun:—Ver. 1. Whatis there higher 
for ἃ poor creature, than for him to come into 
direct communion with God and heavenly beings? 
And yet even this would be an injury if it be- 


came a ground of self-glorification.—Ver. 2. Whe 
could keep to himself a matter like this for four- 
teen years? Those who have great gifts must 
be most watchful over themselves.—Ver. 8. In 
circumstances like these it is God's way to have 
men say: “1 cannot tell; for they are thus 
kept from being puffed with pride. Many les- 
sons God reserves to the higher school of hea- 
ven.—Ver. 4. Not unfrequently God gives His 
people some foretaste of their future blessed- 
ness; but such things are not indispensable to 
our happiness. Our highest excellencies are 
best shown in the modesty with which they are 
enjoyed. Those who have seen most of God’s 
majesty, know not how to humble themselves 
enough, Isa. vi. 5.—Ver. 5. Ineffable grace it 
is when the Lord graciously vouchsafes to turn 
the heart of his servant to his native home, and 
to let him know what no mortal eye, ear or sense 
could perceive. Even if we have done all things, 
what have we to boast of? Luke xvii. 10. Only 
of our infirmities, and yet these should afford us 
no excuse for indolencé and wickedness.—Ver. 
6. Anti-Christianity has sometimes had its origin 
in an excessive veneration for the eminent gifts 
which God has sometimes bestowed upon His 
people.—Ver. 7. Those who have carefully ob- 
served the mysterious ways of Divine wisdom, 
have remarked that without giving any explana- 
tion of his dealings God has deeply humbled 
His own people as wellas other men. To say 
nothing of external afflictions, this is particu- 
larly the case with inward trials. God will gra- 
dually consume and exhaust even the most se- 
cret influences which might injure or destroy the 
highest gifts of His grace. It is His secret 
counsel that many a Christian who seems a fa- 
vorite of heaven, should be encumbered with 
some sore trouble, and taste, perhaps, even the 
powers of hell, until the ends of grace are ac- 
complished, and he is in no danger of self-exal- 
tation. — Ver. Ὁ, ΤΕΥ able once 
enough? How long has the Lord been obliged to 
wait upon thee! Besides, if He lets thee-struggle 
awhile in thy distress, it may wake thee up to 
more faith, hope and patience at last. A Chris- 
tian may have wonderful revelations of God, and 
yet not know much of the secret ways of God 
with Himself. God often seems severe, when He 
is really aiming at our highest good. His help - 
consists not so much in ridding us of the evil, as 
in preserving us under it. Here is the error 
which makes many prayers seem unanswered. 
But is it not help when God keeps us from being 
consumed in the flames?—Ver. 9. Let us not be 
afraid of temptations, but see to it that we lose 
not our hold upon grace by turning aside to evil. 
We need never fear to meet trials if we only 
maintain a vigorous resolution in harmony with 
the inward action of grace, and thus proceed from 
one degree of attainment to another. To keep 
us humble we must never lose sight of our mis- 
erable condition; and yet we may go so far in 
this direction, that we may make shipwreck of 
hope and despair of God’s love and mercy. The 
best state we can attain in this world is, a happy 
assurance by God’s Spirit, that we always have 
in heaven a gracious God and Father. Our whole 
safety depends upon this, for then our hearts 
rest upon God Himself. ‘Lord, give me Thy- 


CHAP. XII. 1-18. 


207 





self, and it is enough!” Ps. lxxiii. 25, 26. God’s 
power seems mightiest when we are conscious 
of our own wretchedness, and in the midst of 
such travail of soul it comes to its perfection. 
The Saviour is obliged frequently to let His peo- 
ple know that they can do nothing of themselves, 
that thus they may be driven to a reliance upon 
grace alone. If they truly boast of their infir- 
mities, they will take pleasure not in their sins, 
but in being humble. Not so with those who 
make an excuse of their infirmities. They have 
no desire, and hence they have no ability to do 
anything. Let them resolve in a proper manner, 
and they will soon accomplish something by Di- 
vine grace; for they will soon cast away all con- 
fidence in their own powers, and make sucha 
use of God’s, that they will triumph over all 
evil, and begin and complete every good work. 
—Ver. 10. The Spirit’s power increases as that 
of the flesh decreases. As I lose my own power 
I am clothed with Christ’s. God makes the crea- 
ture see its own nothingness, that it may be- 
come something in Christ to the praise of His 
glory. God was robbed of His glory when man 
fell, and it can be restored to Him only when 
man is shown in his weakness and nothingness, 
that God may become all in all. Whoever 
strives in his self-sufficiency to live according to 
his own pleasure, acknowledges no subjection to 
God, and will derive no power from him.—Ver. 
11. It is quite possible to be at the same time 
something and nothing. All are striving hard 
to be something, but none like to learn that they 
are nothing. If thou art something, esteem thy- 
self as nothing, and then thou wilt remain some- 
thing, and become something more. 
Rrecer:—VeEnr. 1, etc. Men think at the pre- 
sent day they can gain much attention by some 
wonderful accounts of the invisible world. But 
whoever has not given himself up thoroughly to 
obey the word of the Cross, will find that the 
word from the third heaven and from Paradise 
will be only a manacle of unbelief, and a temp- 
tation to forsake the faith.—Ver. 4. In Divine 
things it is better to have more in store than is 
given out.—Ver. 6. How much honor a man may 
gain before God, by not seeking and not accept- 
ing of the honor which comes from his fellow 
men. Indeed, God’s love goes beyond this, and 
provides against the self-exaltation of His chil- 
dren when they have received what is of real 
value and pleasure to them:—Ver. 7. Mighty 
grace! which can provide that neither height 
nor depth can do us an injury !—Vv. 9, 10. Let 
nothing overwhelm thee; even in utter weak- 
ness be strong, and assured that Christ’s power 
will accomplish some gracious purpose thereby. 
In sorrow’s night, when troubles distress thee, 
His power will defend thee until the sure morn- 
ing comes.—Ver. 14, etc. In preaching the Gos- 
pel of the kingdom, we cannot be too careful to 
avoid not only the reality, but even the slightest 
appearance of a worldly spirit To aid a soul in 
escaping from death and in the work of salva- 
tion, will be a greater joy to your own soul in the 
day of the Lord Jesus than to have won a world, 
Love generally goes downward (7. e., from pa- 
rents to children), in greater strength than it re- 
turns; and what must be said of the great love of 
that God who is nothing but love and from whom 





all good comes, as compared with our feeble 
love! 

Hrvusner:—Ver. 1. Boasting, to please our- 
selves, always lowers us in the esteem of others, 
and is usually punished by some great humilia- 
tion.—Vers. 2, etc. Extraordinary revelations 
have been sometimes given to those who are dis- 
tinguished for piety to strengthen them for their 
duties, by a foretaste of future blessedness. No 
one, however, should long for such revelations, 
and much less make a parade of them when they 
are vouchsafed; for they are not needful toa 
believing and godly life, and in seeking them we 
run great peril of self-deception, of gross errors, 
and above all, of spiritual pride. For every 
spark of pride which accompanies them, our 
fall will have to be so much the deeper.—Ver. 
5. When we glory in our infirmities and con- 
fess that we can do nothing of ourselves, we give 
glory to God.—Ver. 6. The pious man makes it 
his aim not to appear better than he is, but to be 
better than he appears.—Ver. 7. The example 
of Paul is most instructive to all who are called 
to endure severe but unavoidable evils. God 
does not always appear for their help; for 
though He is able, He knows it unwise to do so. 
He knows what is best for us, and He intends to 
try our faith, to purify our hearts, and to sup- 
press that pride which is the greatest foe to emi- 
nence.—Ver. 9. The only consolation which can 
satisfy us in affliction is that which springs from 
an assurance of the Divine favor, and an unre- 
proving conscience. If we long for nothing else, 
we can triumph over all things.—Ver. 10. The 
more we let go all confidence in ourselves and 
leave ourselves entirely and unreservedly in the 
Lord’s hands, the more strength we shall receive 
from Him. Such is the true weakness of a 
Christian. That which is only spurious makes 
excuses for sin, shrinks from conflicts, and has. 
no desires for growth in grace.—Ver. 14. Genu- 
ine love says: ‘‘I seek not yours, but you;”’ that 
which is false seeks for external and adventitious 
advantages, such as power, honor, rank, eic. A 
rare thing it is to find those who love us solely 
for what we are! —Ver. 15. The highest de- 
grees of love are seldom fully reciprocated. The 
Christian must not expect it. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 9. In the weakness of 
the instrument, the power of him who uses it has 
an opportunity to show how completely it can 
triumph over difficulties (chap. iv.7). ‘It isGod’s 
way,” says Luther, ‘‘to manifest His power and 
majesty by means of nothingness and feebleness.” 
Give up praying away thy thorn, O Christian, 
and take to heart the promise of all-sufficient 
grace; then shalt thou begin with Paul to boast 
of thy weakness and shelter thyself in Christ’s 
own power! Thou mighty God and merciful 
Saviour, in covenant with the falling leaves and 
withered grass of human weakness, dost permit 
us to witness miracles of Almighty power precisely 
where our power completely fails us! Teach us. 
to understand an arrangement in which Thy glory 
is in harmony with our joy, and we become sa- 
tisfied for Thy sake with every cross and with 
manifold infirmities; since like a magnet they 
bring down Thy power to us.—Ver. 14. If it is in- 
deed reasonable and just that children should 
support those parents who need their care; 


208 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


EE  “5.΄ᾳᾷΊ0|Γ ΤΤΤΤἜ““5σ τσ aS 


surely it is the duty of churches to sustain their 
spiritual fathers by a return not only of interces- 
sions in their behalf, at the throne of grace, but 
of such honor as is required in 1 Cor. 1x. 11. 
Gertacu:—Ver. 9. The greatest peril to a 
sinful man is pride and self-exaltation. When 
his powers and his gifts seem greatest, and all 
that he attempts succeeds and thrives, great will 
be his temptation to be proud and self-sufficient ; 
and it will be hard to feel continually that all he 
has is of grace. Though our own hearts and 
outward appearances may suggest the contrary, 
never are we better prepared to have God’s 
power work within us and around us, than when 
we are enduring outward and inward afilictions. 
Cuap. x1. 19-x11. 9. Gospel for Sexag. Sunday. 
Hevusner:—The Apostles as the most eminent of the 
followers of Jesus. How they—l, preached and 
were faithful in all their duties, from mere love 
to the Church, and notwithstanding the envy and 
opposition of false teachers; 2, suffered the 
greatest hardships in their work without waver- 
ing from their steadfastness ; 8, were vouchsafed 
more exalted revelations; 4, were nevertheless 
more deeply humbled.—How Christian love suf- 
fers—l, First, it can bring us into deep afflic- 
tions; 2, God will thus purify us, and assimilate 
us to Jesus; 8, His grace is an abundant conso- 
lation. The Christian’s commendation of him- 
self: 1) Its proper occasion: urgent reasons 
(vers. 19-26); 2) Its object: excellences which 
have a spiritual value, labors, sufferings, etc. 
(vv. 23-33), gracious tokens which God vouch- 
safes to us; 3) Its limitations (to boast of 





these things only as gifts of God, and to induce 
others to trust in him).—Comp. Oetinger, Epis. 
telpredigten, S. 151ff., Kap. xii. 1-9; Albertini, 
Predigten, S. 49ff., Kap. xii. 1-10; L. Hofacker, 
S. 199ff., 757ff.; Zeugnisse Evang. Wahrheit, I. 8. 
399ff., Kap. xii. 9; Hossbach, 2 Samml. S. 45ff.; 
Schmidt, Vorhalle des Predigtsegens, 1864, 8, 
884. 

Vers. 1-5. The wonderful incident here re- 
lated, and Paul’s appreciation of it. I. The 
fact itself. 1. The manner in which he speaks 
of himself as the subject of this experience (with 
reluctance and embarrassment vy. 2, 8). 2. The 
time in which it took place (at the commence- 
ment of his religious life, ver. 2). 8. The place 
in which it occurred (in a local heaven, vv. 2, 
4). 4, The state in which the Apostle was (so 
taken up with heavenly things as to be uncon- 
scious of his sentient life, vv. 2, 3). 5. The 
things he saw and heard (were not thought use- 
ful to our knowledge, and so were withheld ver. 
4, II. The Apostle’s estimate of it. 1. Heclearly 
distinguished between an exalted privilege and 
a gracious attainment. 2. Regarded it as very 
liable to become a snare. 38. Esteemed his in- 
firmities and afflictions as more usefulto him. 4, 
And yet he evidently highly appreciated what 
he had here seen and heard.—Vers. 7-10. 1. 
Prayer.—1. Its appropriate objects; 2. Its en- 
couragements; 3. The importunity allowed; 4. 
The limitation finally given. II. Jts Answer— 
1. At the best time, however delayed; 2. With 
transcendent wisdom, and 8. With a view to spi- 
ritual results alone. | 


XVI.—REPROOF OF SOME MORAL IMPERFECTIONS NOT YET REMOVED, AND AD- 
MONITION TO SPARE HIM THE NECESSITY OF APOSTOLIC DISCIPLINE. CON- 
CLUDING ENCOURAGEMENTS AND BENEDICTION. 


Cuarrer XII. 19-21. XIII. 1-14. 


19 Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves unto you? [For a long time! ye are 
thinking that it is to you that we are excusing ourselves πάλαι doxetre; ὅτι ὑμῖν ἀπολο- 
γόυμεθα]; we speak before? God in Christ: but we do all things, dearly beloved, [but 
all, beloved,] for your edifying. For I fear, lest, [haply μήπως} when I come, I shall 
not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would 
not: lest [haply] there be debates [discord]*, envyings [emulation, ζῆλος], wraths, 
strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults: And lest, when I come’ again, 
my God will humble* me among [with respect to, πρὸς] you, and that I shall bewail 
many which have sinned already, [before, προημαρτηχότων], and have not repented of 
the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed. 


20 


21 


XIII. This zs the third time’ I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three 

2 witnesses shall every word be established. I told you before, and foretell you, as if 
I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write [I have said before, 
and now say beforehand, as I did when I was present the second time, so now also 
in my absence, om. I write]® to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all others, 

8 that, if I come again, I will not spare: Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in 
4 me, which [who] to you-ward is not weak, but is mighty in you, For though? he 


CHAP. XII. 19-21. XIII. 1-14. 209 





[For He also, xat γὰρ] was crucified through weakness, yet he liveth by the power of 
God. For we also [om. also]'° are weak in him," but we shall live” with him" by 
5 the power of Gud toward you." Examine yourselveg, whether ye be in the faith; 
prove your own selves. Know [Or, know] ye not y, own selves, how that Jesus 
6 Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? [to some extéht unapproved, τὶ ἀδόχιμο( ] But 
7 I trust that ye shall know that we are not reprobates [unapproved]. Now I pray to 
[yet we pray, εὐχόμεθα δὲ} God that ye do no evil; not that we should appear ap- 
proved, but that ye should do that which is honest, [excellent], though we be as re- 
8 probates [as if unapproved]. For we can do nothing against the truth, but [we can 
9 do something] for the truth. For we are glad, [rejoice, γαίρομεν], when we are weak, 
and ye are strong: and this also” we wish, [pray for, εὐχόμεθα] even your perfection 
[perfect restoration, χατάρτισιν]. Therefore [ write these things being absent, lest 
being present I should use sharpness, according to the power which the Lord hath 
given me to [for, εἰς] edification, and not to [for] destruction. Finally, brethren, fare- 
well, [rejoice, χαίρετε]. Be perfect [be restored to order, χαταρτίζεσθε], be of good com- 
12 fort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you. Greet 
13 one another with a holy kiss. All the saints salute you. The grace of our Lord 
14 Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with 
you all. Amen. [om. Amen]. 


10 
11 


1 Ver. 19.—Ree. has πάλιν [with D.E. K. L. Sin. (3d hand), many cursives, versions, and Greek Fathers], but the prepon- 
derating evidence is in favor of πάλαι (with A Β. F.G. Sin. the Vulg. and several ancient Lat. versions. The latter word 
standing at the beginning of a senteuce is without an example in the N. T., and is in itself so difficult a reading as to seem 
improbable; inasmuch as it makes the whole sentence refer to past instead of present time (Heb. 1. 1); but this only 
makes it more likely to have been altered. Bloomfield and Wordsworth and Conybeare still adhere decidedly to πάλιν, 
but Tisch., Lachm., Alford, Stanley, and most recent editors are equally decided in behalf of πάλαι, and are disposed to re- 
gard πάλιν either as the mistake of transcribers, or as a conjectural emendation and reminiscence of the parallel chap. iii. 1.] 

2 Ver. 19.—Rec. has κατενώπιον for κατέναντι, as it had also in chap. ii. 17. 

3 Ver. 20.—Lachmann has ἔρις for €pets, but it has no sufficient authority. [That of Sin. has since been added to that 
of A. a number of cursives, Syr. Arm. verss., and Chrys. and Theophyl.in favor of Lachmann’s reading. B.D. E.F.G.K. 
L. et al., the Ital. Syr. (later) Copt. Goth. versions, Theodt. Damasc. Tert. Ambrosiast. have épets.] 

4 Ver. 20.—Rec. has ζῆλοι. but ζῆλος has better evidence in its favor. [The plural never occurs in classical nor Septu- 
agint Greek. This, as well as the preceding ἔρεις may have been a correction to conform to the other plurals in the verse 
and to usage. Bloomf. thinks they were a provincialism, and probably genuine. Tisch. has ζῆλος with ἔρεις, while Sin. 
has ζῆλοι with ἔρις]. 

© Ver. 21.—Rec. has ἐλθόντα pe.; but it is the lectio facilior, and it has the least authority. ['EA@dévros μον has A. B. 
F. G. Sin. and many Fathers in its favor. Most MSS. which have the accus. omit also the subsequent pe before ὁ θεός. 
This suggests that both must have been attempted corrections. ] 

6 Ver. 21.—Rec. has ταπεινώσῃ, but ταπεινώσει is better authenticated. The former was an attempt to make the word 
conform to the preceding subjunctive; [and yet it has A. K. Sin. and many Fathers. It may have been as Alford suggests, 
anitacism. The Jatter word has been adopted by Lachm. and Tisch. 

7 Chap. XIII. 1.—Cod. A. reads Ἰδοὺ τρίτ. τοῦτ. ἐτοίμως ἔχω ἐλθεῖν. ᾿Ιδοὺ hasin its behalf also Sin. (3d hand), many cur- 
sives (some omit τουτο), the Vulg. and Ethiop. verss., and Damasc. Theophyl.and Aug.; but it was doubtless borrowed from ch. 
xii. 14. The ἐτοίμ. ἔχω ἐλθ. has also for it the Syr. and Copt. verss., but it was probably taken from the same passage. 
Sin. also has ἵνα before ἐπὶ with some less important authorities, and 7 instead of καὶ, with the Vulg. and Arm. versions. 
Such authority, however, is hardly sufficient for either.] 

8 Ver. 2.—Rec. has γράφω after νῦν. It appears to have been an addition to conform to ver. 10, The best MSS. [A. B. 
Ὁ. F. Sin.] are against it. 

9 Ver. 4 —After the first καὶ yap the Rec. has εἰ, but itis not found in the best MSS. [B. Ὁ. F.G. K. Sin.(3d hand inserts εἰ, 
as doalso the Syr. Vulg. Goth. and several Greek Fathers). It appears to have been a correction on account of the doctrinal 
offence which the text without it gave]. See Exeget notes. 

10 Ver. 4.—The second καὶ of the Rec. [after καὶ yap and before ἡμεισ], has only feeble authority. 

[1 Ver. 4—For ἐν before αὐτῷ A. F. Sin. have σὺν, and for σὺν before the last ἃὐτῷ some less important MSS. have ἐν, 
by an obvious interchange]. 

12 Ver. 4.Much better authority [A. B. Ὁ. F. Sin. Damasc.] is found for ζήσομεν than for ζησόμεθα of the Rec. [D. 
(3d hand) E. K. L. Chrys. Theodt}. 

18 Ver. 4.—Lachmamn puts εἰς ὑμᾶς in brackets, but it has ample authority in its favor. 
rities for its omission are B. and Chrysostom]. 

14 Ver. 7.--Rec. has εὔχομαι 80 as to conform to ἐλπίζω. ἙΕὐχόμεθα has decidedly better evidence. 

15 Ver. 9.—Rec. has δὲ καὶ. The best MSS. leave out the δὲ. 

16 Ver. 14.—The ἀμήν is not critically well established. It is wanting in the best MSS. [A. B. F. 1,, Sin. εἰ al]. 


[The only important autho- 


of the sentence would become necessary if we 


EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 


Vers. 19-21.—For a long time ye are 
thinking that we are excusing ourselves 
unto you (ver. 1).—Paul here guards against 
the erroneous impression which he anticipated 
some might receive from his self-defence, that 
he was standing in judgment before them; he 
assures them that his only object was to do them 
good. Nothing was then of more importance to 
him than their amendment, unless he was willing 
to have their whole conduct come before him in 
his pa capacity. The interrogative form 


adopt the word πάλιν of the Receptus (a reading 
perhaps occasioned by chap. iii. 1.); but it would 
be quite unsuitable if πάλαι be adopted. With 
this latter reading Paul must be understood to 
refer to what would take place, when his Epistle 
should be read or heard at Corinth, especially 
that part which was of an apologetical character. 
Ὑμῖν stands at the commencement of the sen- 
tence for the sake of emphasis. It is the dative 
of direction or tendency (with, or before you) as 
in Acts xix. 83. He was about to set before 
them the positive bearing of his self-defence 
upon them, ὦ. ¢., to show them that its true object 


210 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


nD 


was to promote their spiritual life (οἰκοδομή). 
This required that all obstructions to his Apos- 
tolical influence, and all prejudices and wrong 
thoughts against him and his conduct among 
them, should be removed, and that all depen- 
dence upon their false teachers should be broken 
off. But before he presented this it was of con- 
sequence to assure them that he was standing 
with his apology at the bar of God, to whom 
alone he was responsible.—we speak before 
God in Christ, but all things, beloved, 
for your edification (ver. 19 4).—In these 
words (comp. chap. ii. 7) his object was not to 
affirm the sincerity of his purpose, but to let 
them know that it was to God that he was ac- 
countable, and from God that he expected an 
acquittal. The words in Christ (ἐν Χριστῷ) point 
out the sphere in which he was speaking, one 
far above every human tribunal, as a Christian 
and an Apostle, conscious of his fellowship with 
Christ. In connection with the last clause (ra dé 
πάντα) we must supply λαλοῦμεν (we speak) from 
the preceding sentence. Some would join the sen- 
tence with the preceding [and unite τὰ and dé to- 
gether] so as to read: λαλοῦμεν ταδε πάντα, ete. ; 
but τάδε usually refers to that which follows it, 
and never is made use of by Paulin any other pas- 
sage. [It refers here to something definite, and 
not to all things in general, for it is confined to 
those matters of which he had been speaking, 
and especially his apology for himself]. In this 
last clause also, he makes, by way of concilia- 
tion, a direct appeal to them as his beloved ones 
(ἀγαπητοί), before entering upon a more severe 
remonstrance. The reason for this is apparent 
in vy. 20-21.—For I fear that haply when 
I come, I shall not find you such as I 
would, and that I shall be found unto 
you such as ye would not (ver. 20 a).—He 
here notices the unhappy condition he had rea- 
son to fear they were in, and which called for 
these efforts on his part for their benefit. His 
first reference to this condition is very tender. 
He merely mentions the impression which such 
a state of things would necessarily make upon 
him when he should come among them, and he 
alludes to the proceedings which such a state 
would necessarily call forth from him. Even 
when he says, J fear lest, etc., he expresses the 
solicitude of a father, and his earnest desire 
that his intercourse with them might be free 
from annoyance; but in μήπως we have some- 
thing likewise of a conciliatory nature. [The 
word is used in two successive clauses (ana- 
phora), but in the third (ver. 21) it is exchanged 
for μὴ, inasmuch as the hesitation to express his 
thought in decisive terms wears away as he pro- 
ceeds, The expressions: ‘‘such as ye would 
not,” and ‘such as I would,” are euphemistic, 
to avoid a more disagreeable phrase. The use 
of the verb ϑέλω for βούλομαι was not uncommon, 
and yet we may recognize something of the 
specific meaning of ϑέλω here, inasmuch as the 
Apostle meant perhaps to express some deter- 
mination of the will in the case]. In xa@yé—olov 
ov ϑέλετε he shows that he was painfully con- 
scious of an Apostolic power of discipline which 
he would be obliged to exert; and he now re- 
appears in that triumphant attitude of authority 
which he had formerly assumed (comp. Meyer). 





Ὑμῖν has not the sense of: by you, but to you, or 
Jor you, asin Rom. vii. 10, The position of the 
second ov before the ϑέλετε is especially empha- 
tic.* What he meant by such as he would not, he 
shows in greater detail in the second part of ver. 
20 and in ver. 21.—lest I shall find, per- 
chance, among you debate, emulation, 
passions, contentions, slanderings, whis- 
perings, insolences, tumults (ver. 20).— 
The unpleasant things which he found are ar- 
ranged under two different relations, according 
to the two different kinds of moral defect he 
knew to be in the Church. [Beneen: ‘That 
which was not such as he would, is treated of to 
the end of the chapter, then what was such 
as they would not, is treated of from chap. 
xiii. 1 and onwards.” Such vices indicate how 
great were the difficulties to be met with in 
churches just emerged from heathenism, but 
we are not to suppose them prevalent among 
that portion which Paul had described in chap. 
vii. as penitent and obedient]. Not, however, 
until the-commencement of the next chapter does 
he come to speak of the exercise of his Apostolic 
power to punish offenders (for in the next verse 
he brings before us another kind of offences). 
To μήπως ἔρις, etc., must be supplied εὑρεϑῶσιν 
(or ὦσιν) ἐν ὑμῖν. We have ἔρις and ζῆλος in 1 
Cor. iii. 8, and ἔρις in 1 Cor. i. 11; on ἔρεδες comp. 
Winer, 3 9 [p. 59, Philad. ed.]. Θυμοί occurs also 
in Gal. y. 20, and signifies vehement passion, 
boiling emotion. θυμός signifies the heart as the 
seat of passionate emotion, and then this emotion 
itself—passion, wrath, rage; the plural is found 
also in the classic writers. Ἕρίϑεια signifies 
hired work, mercenariness, love of intrigue, a 
disposition to foment parties. See Rom. ii. 8; 
Gal. νυν. 20; Phil. i. 17; ii. 3; James iii. 14, 16 (not 
of ἔρις.) Com. Meyer and Fritzsche on Rom. ii. 
8. Καταλαλιαί signifies, evil reports in general; 
ψιϑυρίσμοί, secret slanderings. The original verb 
of φυσιώσεις is used with reference to the inso- 
lence of faction, an arrogant conceit of know- 
ledge, and arrogance with respect to gifts in 
general, in 1 Cor. iv. 6; viii. 1; xiii. 4. ᾿Ακα- 
ταστασίαι occurs in chap. vi. 5; 1 Cor. xiv. 88. 
In addition to these moral defects, which had 





{* The whole comment of Chrysostom on this verse is 80 
characteristic a specimen of his discrimination and acute. 
ness, that I cannot resist the inclination to transcribe it:— 
“Tt was not here out of arrogance, nor the authority of 8 
teacher, but out of a father’s tender concern, when he is 
more fearful and trembling than the sinners are themselves 
at that which is likely to reform them. And not even 80 
does he run them down (κατατρέχει), nor make an absolute 
assertion, but says doubtingly (ἐνδοιάδων):: ‘lest perchance 
when I come,’ etc. Nor does he call them not virtuous or 
wicked (évapérovs), but: ‘I shall not find you such as 1 
would ;’ everywhere employing terms of affection. And the 
words: ‘J shall find, are those of one who would express 
what is out of natural expectation (τὸ mapa προσδοκίαν 
δηλοῦντός ἐστίν), a8 are also those: ‘J skall be found by you. 
For the thing is not of deliberate choice, but of a necessity 
originating with you. Wherefore he says: ‘I shall be found 
such as ye would not.’ He said not here: such as Iwould a 
but with more severity: ‘such as ye wish nol, for it woul 
in that case become his own will, not indeed what he would 
first have willed, but his will nevertheless. For he might 
indeed have said again, ‘such as I would not,’ and so have 
shown his love; but he wishes not to relax (ἐκλῦσαι) bis 
hearer. Yea, rather, his words would in that case have 
been even harsher (τραχύτερος), but now he has at once 
dealt them a smarter blow, and showed himself more gentle. 
For this is the characteristic of his wisdom (τὸ βαθύτορον 
τέμνοντα, ἠμερώτερον πλήττειν), cutting more deeply, to 
strike more gently ”). 


CHAP. XII. 19-21. 


XIII. 1-14. 211 





their origin in the factious spirit prevailing at 
Corinth, and hence called for decisive measures, 
the Apostle now proceeds (ver. 21) tomention some 
manifestations of that sensuality for which their 
city was noted.—Lest again when I come, 
my God shall humble me with respect to 
you (ver. 21 a).—There is no need of commenc- 
ing a new period here, and so of giving this whole 
verse aninterrogativeform. The reading ταπει- 
νώσει does not require this, for this word, like the 
μή (previously μήπως), indicates simply an in- 
creased anxiety that such a sad calamity should 
not come upon him. We may also notice that a 
question calling for a negative answer (comp. 
vers. 17, 18) would not be appropriate in this 
connection (ver. 20). The πάλιν qualifies the 
whole phrase: ἐλϑόντος μου ταπεινώσει μὲ (comp. 
chap. ii. 1), and not merely either ἐλϑόντος μου 
or ταπεινώσει. He does not intend to say that 
he had experienced a similar mortification during 
some former visit [and yet comp. chap. ii. 1. We 
see not how πάλιν can have its force without 
supposing some reference to a former visit, even 
if it should be made to qualify ἐλϑόντος alone. 
And yet this could not have been his first visit 
when he had great success and general joy in 
spite of his persecutions, but certainly no such 
humiliations. We are obliged to think of a second 
unrecorded visit between his first and second 
Epistle. See on ver. 1 of the next chapter]. 
The genitive absolute here is remarkable, and 
hence the reading in the Receptus. The tarec- 
νοῦν has reference not to the exercise of disci- 
pline among them, as if this would produce a 
feeling of humiliation on account of his love to 
the Church and to the Lord, and would be 
traceable to God because it would take place ac- 
cording to the Divine will, but rather to the mor- 
tification the Apostle would experience if he were 
compelled to see the fruit of his labors among 
them utterly destroyed, and thus to find all his 
boasting either much abated or completely 
wrested from him. Should such a humiliation 
eome upon him, he would trace it to the hand of 
God, and receive it as a wholesome discipline. 
He would therefore humbly submit himself to it, 
and find consolation in the reflection that the God 
who did it was Ais God (Rom. i. 8; 1 Cor. i. 4), 
the God whom he served, and with whom he was 
in such intimate fellowship that the interests of 
one were the interests of both. If we give the 
word the sense of: to trouble, or to grieve, it 
will have precisely the same signification with 
mevdjow. Πρὸς ὑμᾶς has here the sense, not of: 
with or among you, for with such a meaning it 
would be superfluous, but of: in respect to you. 
—And I shall bewail many of those who 
have sinned before and have not repented 
of the uncleanness and fornication and 
lasciviousness which they have commit- 
ted (ver. 21 6). The word πενϑεῖν signifies, to 
mourn, to lament, lugere, especially for the dead, 
etc. It expresses the genuine feeling of a spiri- 
tual pastor (comp. Calvin), and perhaps it alludes 
to the idea of a spiritual death. It expresses 
either the sorrow he would feel on account of 
their impenitence (Meyer), or the grief he would 
teel in denouncing punishment or in excommuni- 





pronounced with outward signs of sorrow and 
mourning; see 1 Cor. y. 2; 2 Cor. vii. 7, 9 (Old 
Paraphrase). Perhaps the customs attending 
excommunication were derived from an extreme 
interpretation of such passages]. The objects of 
this sorrow are mentioned when he says: 
πολλοὺς τῶν προημαρτηκότων καὶ μὴ μετανοησάντων, 
etc. This is not an inexact form for designating 
a general class, instead of saying τοὺς μὴ μετα- 
γοήσαντας ; many, 2. e., who have not repented. 
But the Apostle had not in mind all uncon- 
verted sinners, in every congregation, among 
whom he gaye especial prominence to those in 
Corinth by using the word πολλὸυς (Liicke), for 
nothing in the context warrants us in giving 
such an extension to the idea. He unquestiona- 
bly had his eye upon sinners in Corinth alone, 
when he used the phrase προημαρτηκότες, ete. But 
our further explanation must depend upon the 
answer to the question, whether ἐπὶ τῇ ἀκαϑαρσίᾳ, 
etc., should be connected with μετανοησάντων or 
with πενϑήσω. The first method would be with- 
out analogy, so far as the New Testament is con- 
cerned, for in every instance there, μεταν. is con- 
strued with ἀπό or ἐκ (with ἐπέ only in the Old 
Testament, in Joel ii. 18, and Amos vii. 3, where 
the μετανοεῖν in both cases is the act of God). 
And yet it is probably admissible, even if the 
idea of a mere change of mind without that of 
sorrow for sin, be connected with the word. It 
would then signify, a change of mind in respect 
to, or on account of, etc. [Osiander draws at- 
tention to the contrast of προ: and pera:] The 
connection of the words with πενϑήσω seems ra- 
ther unusual and strange, inasmuch as in other 
places we meet with πενϑεῖν ἐπέ τινε in the sense 
of: to lament over something, but not with 
πενϑεῖν τινα ἐπί τινι. It is, however, not altoge- 
ther unallowable on this account. If we adopt 
the first mode of connecting the words, we must 
understand by πολλούς the worst among the class 
of persons mentioned (De Wette, Osiander), 7. ¢., 
those whom he would be obliged to punish by 
excluding them from the Church {(πενϑεῖν would 
then be: to mourn for them as dead persons; 
and it is used with respect to such an act in 1 
Cor. v.2). If we adopt the other mode, προημαρ- 
τηκότες, etc., would signify those who had in any 
manner sinned, efc., and we should make the 
Apostle say that he feared he should have to 
mourn over many of these on account of the sins 
of the flesh, of which they were guilty; and he 
designs to mention here the other class of sins 
which were most prevalent at Corinth (7. 6., 
besides those mentioned in ver. 20). We prefer 
the second of the methods, because the reference 
to the excommunication of the worst contains 
something unnatural, and 1 Cor. v. 2 by no 
means justifies us in referring πενϑήσω to such ἃ 
transaction. Against this second method no ob- 
jection should be urged on account of the posi- 
tion of πενϑήσω, nor of the thought itself, to 
mourn for one on account of such things. Πενϑήσω 
stands at the commencement of the clause for the 
sake of emphasis, and ἐπί stands not at a very 
extraordinary distance from it. The Apostle 
might very reasonably be understood to mourn 
over such impenitent persons on account of their 


cating them (De Wette, et al.). [In ancient times | sins, even though he does not in this place, as in 
sentence of condemnation in the Church was | other places (comp. 1 Cor. vi, 9, 10), bring pro- 


212 





minently before us the consequences of those 
sins. The προ, however, refers not to the period 
before their conversion, but to the time preceding 
his second visit, when misunderstandings had 
begun to prevail, and when he had admonished 
them to repent (comp. chap. xiii. 2), though 
with so little suecess that he found the peculiar 
faults mertioned in vers. 20 and 21 were still 
prevalent among them. ᾿Ακαϑαρσία signifies 
sins of a sensual nature generally, such as de- 
tiled both soul and body, Rom. i. 24; Gal. v. 19; 
Eph. iv. 19. Πορνεία (1 Cor. v. 1), and ἀσέλ- 
γεια (wantonness, shamelessness, voluptuousness, 
Rom. xiii. 13; Gal. v. 19, e¢ al.), are particular 
exhibitions of ἀκαϑαρσία. Πράσσειν signifies, to 
bring about, achieve (comp. Passow). We do 
not (with Meyer and Osiander) make μὴ petavon- 
σάντων refer to those who should be impenitent 
at the anticipated coming of the Apostle at Co- 
rinth: ‘¢*and shall not have repented,” but to the 
fruitlessness of his admonitions when he was 
among them the second time. [The perfect in 
pon. has here a special force and significance, 
implying that the sins were continued, and were 
rot overcome by a true repentance. The aorist 
of μὴ μεταν. is in contrast with this, and we see 
no reason why it may not be taken in the sense 
of a futur. exact, ¢. e., those who will not have 
repented when I shall be with you]. 

Chap. xiii. 1-4. Thisis the third time Iam 
coming to you (ver la) —Now ‘follows the 
Apostle’s announcement of his determination to 
proceed with an unsparing judicial severity, in 
accordance with what he had said in chap. xii. 
20: Kayo εὑρηϑῶ ὑμῖν, οἷον ov ϑέλετε. Τρίτον τοῦτο 
signifies here: this is the third time, as in John 
xxi. 14, εἰ al. *Epyouaspeaks of hisactual coming, 
and presupposes that he had been at Corinth twice 
before this (it cannot refer to a mere purpose or 
plan of such a journey, nor to a coming by letters). 

[General note on Paul's visits to Corinth. It 
seems to us impossible to interpret 2 Cor. xiii. 
1, on any other view than that Paul had pre- 
viously been twice at Corinth. It cannot be 
made to mean simply, this is the second time I 
have been ready, and if it could it would have 
been a most unfortunate reference, in which 
he would rather remind his readers of his failure 
actually to come. The usual appeal to chap. xii. 
14, is unsatisfactory, not only because our pas- 
sage should not be a repetition of that, but be- 
cause the proper idea of that is, 7 am ready to 
come the third time. The word διέρχομαι in 1 Cor. 
xvi. 5, is not quite to the point (Wordsworth), 
since it would only show how the will was taken 
for the fact, but would not account for his expected 
coming, being the third of a series of the same 
kind. Certainly no one, reading 2 Cor. xiii 1, 
without a previous bias, would ever think of any- 
thing but athird actual visit. In 2 Cor. ii. 1, 
Paul also implies that he had once visited them 
‘‘in heaviness,” evidently on account of the 
misconduct of Christians there; in 2 Cor. xii. 
21 he intimates that God had then humbled him; 
and in 2 Cor. xiii. 2 (rightly rendered) he im- 
plies that he had then given them warning that 
if he came again he would not spare them. Now 
when could that visit have been paid? The 
whole idea is unsuitable to the first visit when 
the church was formed. Nor could it have been 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


FF 


afier that which we now call the First Epistle, 
waen he announced his intention to remain at 
Corinth until Pentecost (1 Cor. xvi. 8), and aftet 
‘*the Epistle”? in which he had written to them 
‘‘not to keep company with fornicators” (1 Cor. 
v. 9), and answered the inquiries the Corinthians 
had made of him (1 Cor. vii. 1). See Introd 3 
6. But we know that Paul resided at Ephesus 
during the whole time between his first visit to 
Corinth and his journey through Macedonia, 
during which he wrote our present Second Epis- 
tle. There must, however, have been time enough 
after his departure from Corinth for the spring- 
ing up of the disorders which were censured in 
that unrecorded visit, and the subsequent lost 
Epistle, and for the sending of a letter and per- 
haps a deputation from the Corinthian Church 
to Paul (1 Cor. vii. 1; i. 11; xvi. 17). On the 
supposition that Paul came to Ephesus late in 
the year 54, Alford ventures to place the unre- 
corded journey in the Spring of 55, and the lost 
Epistle in the Spring of 57, or at least early in 
the same year in which he left Ephesus for Ma- 
cedonia (1 Cor. xvi. 8). As Ephesus and Corinth 
were the usual points of transit between Asia 
and Europe, Paul might easily have made a brief 
visit of the kind supposed, but as it was attended 
with no special results, it was not mentioned in 
the Acts. The shipwrecks and disasters at sea 
mentioned in 2 Cor. xi. 28-28, indicate that Paul 
must have made several yoyages during his mis- 
sionary life, which are not recorded. Comp. 
Alford, Introd. to Cor. 3 5., and Essay on How 
to use the Epistles in Sun. Mag. for 1867. J. L. 
Davies, Art. Paul in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible]. 
In the mouth of two witnesses and of 
three shall every word be established 
(ver. 1b).—By a citation from the very letter of 
the Law in Deut. xix. 15, the Apostle lets them 
see how rigid and precise were to be his disci- 
plinary proceedings when he should come te 
them this third time. He would so arrange the 
proceedings that the witnesses should be heard 
in the presence of the congregation (comp. 1 
Cor. vy. 12, 13, 3, efe.), for in the trial of noto- 
rious offences, it would be necessary to adhere 
strictly to all legal forms, that he might avoid 
any appearance of partiality. “Ῥῇμα [the word, 
after the Hebrew manner] stands here for the 
matter, cause, conduct or charge in dispute. 
Σταϑήσεται, signifies: shall be established, deter- 
mined or brought to a decision. ᾿Ἐπὶ στόματος, t. 
e., on account of what is spoken. The καί instead 
of ἢ before τριῶν was designed to imply, and by 
three, if there are so many; or, also by three, 28 
if he had said, from two to three. The free appli- 
cation which some have made of this citation 
from the law, (either to his repeated warnings 
and their certainty and validity; or to those re- 
peated announcements of his coming with the 
accompanying warnings and threatenings which 
were equally sure to prove true; or to the va- 
rious occasions on which he had been or was about 
to be present among them, as if these were dis- 
tinct personal witnesses to establish the truth of 
the matter) seems to us by no means ingenious 
or plausible, even if we accept the more delicate 
and profound explanation which Osiander pro- 
poses, viz., that his apostolic visits among them 
were, in consequence of their repetition, not 


a 4. 


CHAP. XII. 19-21. 





merely means by which he directly saw them, 
but distinct practical attestations of his faithful 
testimony among them, deposing against those 
who should continue impenitent (comp. Matth. 
viii. 4; x. 18).*—Whether any relation was in- 
teniled between τρίτον and τριῶν is very uncer- 
tain. Inasmuch as he was about to announce in 
ver. 2, that he was now determined to proceed 
in an unsparing manner against them, it is diffi- 
cult to perceive in what way he can imply that 
he was especially patient in delaying and in re- 
peatedly warning them.—What is said in 1 Tim. 
v. 19 shows that the law in such matters was not 
looked upon as abrogated. [Its validity, how- 
ever, depended upon its general reasonableness 
and upon Christ’s recognition and re-institution 
(Matth. xviii. 15) and not upon the perpetual ob- 
ligation of the Mosaic precept].—I have said 
already and now say beforehand, as when 
I was present the second time so now 
also in my absence, to them which here- 
tofore have sinned and to all the rest (ver. 
2a).—The verb προείρηκα (I have said before) 
has reference to previous announcements which 
still remained in force (perfect tense), and zpo- 
λέγω (1 foretell) to what he was then writing [in 
which he probably used precisely the same 
words, viz.: ‘‘If 1 come again,” ete.] With re- 
spect to the former, he says: that he had said 
when present the second time, 7. e., as I did 
when I was present the second time; and with 
respect to the latter he says, I say beforehand, 
now when I am absent (kai ἀπὼν νῦν, comp. ver. 
10). There is a correspondence between the two 
clauses 'τροείρηκα and προλέγω on the one hand, 
and τὸ δεύτερον and νῦν on the other, and hence 
the τὸ δεύτερον should not be separated from 
παρών aud connected with προλέγω. It is evident 
from ver. 1 (τρίτον τοῦτο ἔρχομαι) and other pas- 
sages, that the Apostle had already been twice 
at Corinth, and hence there is no need of the in- 
terpretation here: ‘‘as if I were present the se- 
cond time, although I am now absent.” The 


[ἢ Stanley (with whom Wordsworth agrees) thinks it un- 
likely that Paul would express himself so formally and yet 
so imperfectly if he merely intended to speak of the usual 
legal procoss. He therefore contends that “ the journeys of 
the Apostle, accomplished or intended, occupy throughout 
the Epistle a prominent place in his mind; and now they 
seem to him to assume almost a distinct persunal existence, 
as though oach constituted a separate attestation to his as- 
sertion. He, as it were, appears to himself, a different per- 
son, and, therefore, a different witness in each journey ac- 
coniplished or proposed. The first witness was that which 
he had delivered during his first visit, or in his first Epistle 
(iv. 20); to which he refers in the words: ‘I have said be- 
fore’ (προείρηκα). The second witness was that which he 
now bure on his present journey and through his present 
Epistle, whizh was intended to supply the place of the jour- 
ney once int2nded (chap. i. 15; 1 Cor. xvi. 7) but now aban- 
doned by him. To this he refers in the word mpoAcyw ‘I 
speak beforehand,’ 7. e., before my next visit; and he 
strengthens this witness by representing himself as in a 
Dianner present on that second visit which had really been 
postponed (ὡς; παρὼν τὸ δεύτερον). It is by thus reckoning 
his secoud Lpistle as being virtually a second visit, or at 
least a secon! witness, that he was enabled in the first 
verse, to call the visit which was now about to be actually 
accomplished, his third visit. And this third visit would be 
reckoned as tae third witness, if it were necessary that the 
words quoted from Deut. were to be literally complied with.” 
We have theught it fair that this view (which had so 
general «a support in ancient, and until recent. times), should 
be thus fairly presented, but we agree with Barnes when he 
says, that “with all respect due to such great names, it 
seems to us that this is trifling and childish in the extreme.” 
Honge: “ Three visits are xot the testimony of three wit- 
nesses.”’] 





XIII. 1-14. 213 


_ iy 


προημαρτηκότες were those in general who had 
previously sinned (and even then [open perfect] 
continued to do so), whether before his second 
Visit (ὡς παρὼν τὸ δεύτερον), or until his present 
writing (ἀπὼν viv). The λοιποί were not those 
who had become impure after those just men- 
tioned, as if προημαρτ. were related to προείρηκα 
and οἱ λοιποί to προλέγω, for such an expression 
would be not only forced but indistinct. It means 
rather the remaining members of the congrega- 
tion, either such as witnessed his threatenings, 
or (better) such as should be brought by his 
warnings and their own reflection to a reforma- 
tion, and hence such as would not fall under 
discipline. The substance of what he had thus 
told them, and now foretold them, was:—that 
if [come againI willnotspare (ver. 2b).— 
In the words εἰς τὸ πάλιν, the πάλιν which had 
been used as a noun, is converted by the εἰς back 
again into an adverb. Why it was that he had 
been so lenient on his second visit is not told us - 
it may have been because he had hoped that they 
would themselves come to a better mind by re- 
flection, or because he had feared that he would 
only make matters worse, ete. With οὐ φείσομαι 
is intimately connected what is said in ver. 3.— 
Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking 
in me, who toward you is not weak, but 
is strong among you (ver.3).—The reason he 
would not spare them, is introduced by ἐπεί: “I 
will not spare, since now ye seek, and indeed 
challenge by your conduct a proof,” efc. Others 
make ἐπεὶ ζητεῖτε the protasis or conditional pro- 
position to ver. 5, and regard the words, “Whois 
not weak toward you—by the power of God to- 
ward you,” or at least the whole of ver. 4, as a 
parenthesis. Such a construction, however, 
seems unnecessary and awkward. Δοκιμήν, 
which stands for emphasis at the commence- 
ment of the sentence, signifies: proof, trial, 
verification by experiment [see on 2 Cor. ii. 9]. 
The genitive, however, may be either of the ob- 
ject: the proof of the fact, efc., ἡ. e., the proof 
that Christ is speaking in me; or of the subject: 
that Christ may give proof that He is in me, 
That which follows, who is not weak toward you, 
etc., is rather in favor of the latter interpreta- 
tion. In the words, Christ speaking in me, he had 
reference not merely to Christ’s speaking through 
him (év==0:4), but to Christ’s being and acting 
inhim. By their impenitent conduct they were 
putting Him to the proof whether he could carry 
out what He had threatened against them, and 
so they challenged Him to make a demonstration 
of His power to punish them. What is said in 
the relative sentence, was intended to make 
them consider how dangerous such a challenge 
was: ‘*who is not weak with respect to you 
{etc}, but is mighty among [ἐν] you.” In this 
he refers not to earlier manifestations of this 
power among them by means of spiritual gifts 
and miracles, etc., but to such an exercise of it 
among them as would become indispensable to 
punish them if they continued impenitent. The 
word δυνατεῖ occurs nowhere else except here 
and in Rom. xiv. 4, though it is analogous to 
ἀδυνατεῖ, and was perhaps occasioned by the use 
of aoderet. The reason for the assertion that 
Christ was not weak but mighty, he now pro- 
ceeds to give in ver. 4:—For he also was 


214 





crucified on account of weakness, but he 
lives on account of the power of God 
(ver. 4a). The Apostle here reminds tliem that 
Christ was once reduced to an extremity of 
weakness, but that he now lived by the power of 
God. That extremity was when He endured 
crucifixion in consequence of the human infir- 
mity which He had experienced in the season of 
His (voluntary) humiliation and privation (Phil. 
ii. 7-11). Ἔκ here designates the cause or ori- 
gin. The ζῇν refers to the life of absolute power 
(energy) which began with Christ’s resurrec- 
tion, was derived from God, and was afterwards 
proved by influences among men (comp. Rom. 
vi. 4; Acts ii. 33; Eph. i. 20-23; Phil. ii. 9). 
If we accept the reading: καὶ γὰρ εἰ (which Osi- 
ander with Tischendorf adopts as the lect. diffic.), 
εἰ must be taken as concessive, and by itself it 
seems not inconsistent with the ἀλλά which fol- 
lows. But καὶ yap does not correspond with ἀλλά 
very well, inasmuch as it signifies not merely: 
for, but: for even. Καὶ yap εἰ would then sig- 
nify: for even (although) if. But καὶ εἰ indi- 
cates that the condition must be looked upon as 
an extreme one, and not to be expected. On 
the other hand εἰ καί would have implied that 
this condition was probable or certain, but that 
for the argument in hand it was a matter of in- 
difference. We are obliged in this case to sup- 
pose that there has been an exchanging of καὶ εἰ 
for εἰ καί, which must be ascribed to some trans- 
criber having interpolated the εἰ, rather than to 
Paul. A concessive protasis appears appropriate 
on account of the ἀλλά. The solution of the dif- 
ficulty which Osiander proposes, viz., that the 
καί implies that the case of Christ was similar to 
that of his ministers, does not seem clear to us, 
and indeed appears unintelligible. The best 
way would seem to be, to leave out the εἰ, as it 
may easily have been inserted. It is evident that 
the Apostle looked upon this as the actual condi- 
tion in which Christ was, for he now proceeds to 
show that he himself was in the same condition 
of weakness and life through the power of God: 
—for we also are weak in him, but we 
shall live together with him through the 
power of God toward you (ver. 4).—It is 
evident, therefore, that he leaves us to infer what 
must be the condition of Christ from that of one 
who stood in fellowship with Christ (ἐν---σὺν 
αὐτῷ) ; inasmuch as the condition of the former 
was reflected or was repeated in that of his fol- 
lowers, or was the consequence of it. ᾿Ασϑενοῦ- 
μὲν refers not to the Apostle’s sufferings, but to 
his appearing to lack power when he spared the 
Corinthians It must be regarded, therefore, as 
something which was like Christ’s own weak- 
ness, voluntarily assumed. He describes it also 
by the words ἐν αὐτῷ as something which was 
the consequence of his fellowship with Christ 
[Wivner’s Idioms, 3 52, p. 311 note], and there- 
fore like Christ’s own weakness transient and 
temporary, inasmuch as the Divine power which 
made Christ alive would necessarily and in that 
very act make alive all who were connected with 
him (σὺν ἀυτῷ). And indeed, εἰς ὑμᾶς indicates 
that his being alive would be manifested in the 
energy by which they would be directed. There is 
no reference in the word ζῃν, as here used, 
to the future resurrection, but it means simply to 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 





be vigorous, to be full of life. Neanprer: “In 
the discharge of our Apostolic authority among 
you will be manifested the Divine power of a 
risen and glorified Christ.” [The Apostle, in 
this passage, surely claims that Christ spoke and 
acted in him, and we reasonably infer that his 
Apostolic words, Epistles and acts were those of 
an infallible Christ within him. It has been 
said that he never advanced suchaclaim. Not 
only in the ἀλλὰ, which occurs in both clauses 
of ver. 4, but in the use of the present (ζῇ 
ἀσϑενοῦμεν) and the future (ζήσομεν) in opposi- 


tion'to (ἐσταυρώϑη). we have a strong contrast 
with the resurrection and all its endless and 
perpetual influences through Christ and His 


people]. 

Vers. 5-10.—Examine your own selves 
whether ye are in the faith, prove your 
own selves (ver. 5a).—In opposition to the 


‘ 


thought represented in ver. 3, according to which 


they desired a proof of Christ in him, the Apostle 
presents the demand that they should direct 
their examination to their own selves. For the 
sake of emphasis ἑαυτούς is put first. Πειράζειν 
signifies, to make proof or trial of one, to 
tempt (1 Cor. x. 9, ἐκπειράζειν Χριστόν, which is 
here the same as δοκιμὴν ζητεῖν, etc.). [On the 
ordinary distinction to be observed between 
these expressions, see TRENCH, Synn. 2d Part, p. 
119ff]. He then more particularly defines the 


point to which that self-examination should be 


directed, ἡ, e., whether they were in the faith; 


thus probably intimating that their δοκιμὴν ζητεῖν. 


betrayed a serious defect in that respect, inas- 
much as they would hardly have needed any 
proof of Christ in him if they had been in the 
faith. Zo bein the faith, or, to esteem themselves 
standing in the faith, were phrases which desig- 


nated a living Christianity, the original principle 


of which is a faith laying hold of Christ, surren- 
dering the whole heart to Him, and in this way 
bringing us into fellowship with Him (not: fides 
gaz creditur, in contrast with erroneous doc- 
trines; and also not the faith of miracles). The 
δοκιμάζειν also is not in this passage equivalent 
to δόκιμον ποιεῖν, but as in 1 Cor. xi, 28, it sig- 
nifies, to try, to inquire into the worthiness of a 
thing, with the view of accurately distinguishing 
between what is and what is not genuine. The 
word here properly refers back to their seeking 
a proof of Christ (δοκιμὴν ζητεῖτε). The essen- 
tial nature of the faith is further pointed out in 
the succeeding clause.—Or know ye not 


your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in 


you, except ye are to some extent unap- 
proved (ver. ὃ δ) ?—(Comp. Eph. iii. 17; Gal. ii. 
20). The use of the entire name ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός 
indicates more than usual solemnity, and implies 
that the presence of Christ’s spirit, by faith, in 
the Church and in the hearts of its members, pro- 
duces a practical fellowship with the whole per- 
son of Christ (comp. vi. 16; 1 Cor. iii. 16; Eph. 
ii, 21-22). In ἑαυτούς, ὅτι---ἐν ὑμῖν we have an 
attraction of a peculiar kind (where the attracted 
word is not the subject of the succeeding sen- 
tence). [Winer’s Idioms, 3 63, 8. a. p. 896]. 
Yourselves (favréuc) in this connection is empha- 
tic, since it is contrasted with Christ speaking in 
you, in ver. 8. [Our English version entirely 
overlooks the ἢ at the head of the clause.] There 


eee δ νι 


CHAP, XII. 19-21. 


XIII. 1-14. 215 





are two ways by which ἢ οὐκ ἐπέγιεν. etc., may be 1 such a designation to the punishment he inflicted; 


connected in sense with that which precedes it; 
according to the first, the spiritual relation which 
Christ sustained toward them, and of which in- 
deed they must be conscious if they were Chris- 
tians, imposed on them the obligation to examine 
more carefully into their relation to Him and 
their conduct toward Him, and of course into 
their faith, in order to ascertain whether it was 
not wavering (Osiander). According to the 
second, he appeals to their sense of honor, and 
implies that for this reason they should not 
shrink from self-examination; 7. ¢., they surely 
ought not to be so entirely destitute of a Chris- 
tian spirit as not to know their own selves 
(Meyer, deWette). In either case there was a 
motive for self-examination; but the 7 οὐκ argues 
in favor of the lattermethod. In εἰ μήτε ἀδόκιμοι 
ἔστε, he intended to say, that they would find 
this to be the case with themselves, unless ‘they 
should prove to be unworthy, spurious Chris- 
tians (OstanpER: He throws out.a doubt of that 
gracious state to which they laid claim, in the 
same proportion in which they were ignorant of 
their relation toChrist and did not examine them- 
selves). ’Ez μήτι is used in 1 Cor. vii. 5; and the 
rt has the effect rather to soften the force of the 
expression [unless ye are ‘‘ somewhat reprobates,”’ 
or ‘‘to some extent abide not the proof’]. Αδόκιμοι 
has reference to δοκιμάζετε and δοκιμῆν, which he 
had previously used.—But I trust ye shall 
know that we are not unapproved (ver. 
6).—This verse is intimately connected with the 
latter part of ver.5. ἀδόκιμοι, in this verse, has 
reference to Paul’s power as an Apostle to punish 
offenders, and he expresses the hope that (in 
case he should be compelled to exercise it) they 
would find him [if they ventured to put him to 
the proof ] (in this respect) not unapproved, i.e, 
as one who throws out empty threatenings, but 
is too feeble to execute them; but rather one 
who would make those who perseveringly re- 
sisted him feel his power (comp. vv. 7 and 9). 
This was the δοκιμή which they sought (ver. 3). 
His hope, however, was not fixed exclusively 
upon the punishment in itself, but upon the pro- 
per authentication of his office, the maintenance 
of his Apostolic authority by such means. The 
interpretation which maintains that γνώσεσϑε 
(ye shall know) is to be understood, not of an 
experimental knowledge, but of a knowledge 
gained by their reformation in consequence of 
his warning, or by an observation of his life 
and works as an Apostle [i.¢., if you put our 
Apostolical power to the test by appealing to 
our clemency], is not quite consistent with 
the general scope of the passage. The same 
may be said of the view which aims to me- 
diate between the different explanations, and 
maintains that the knowledge was to be obtained 
partly by an examination of themselves and 
partly by their experience of ecclesiastical disci- 
pline.—But in ver. 7 he shows that he would 
gladly be spared such an authentication of his 
power:—But we pray God that ye do no 
evil (ver. 72) ;—His desire is expressed in the 
form of a prayer. The explanation which makes 
ὑμᾶς the object and the Apostle himself the sub- 





2, because κακὸν ποιεῖν μηδέν has an evident refe- 
rence to τὸ καλὸν ποιεῖν [the one being what is 
morally bad or worse, and the other what is mo- 
rally honorable, beautiful and right].—not that 
we should appear approved, but that ye 
should do what is good, though we be as 
unapproved (ver. 74).—He here expresses 
what was more particularly the purport of his 
prayer. (Weshould observe the change which 
here takes place in the construction: the infini- 
tive and iva, comp. προσεύχεσϑαι iva Col. i. 9; 2 
Thess. i. 11). The prayer was not (I pray or I 
desire), that he might appear approved (in con- 
sequence of the infliction of punishment, or the 
accomplishment of his threatenings) but that the 
Corinthians might do well (that which is right), 
though he should be unapproved (inasmuch as his 
threatenings would remain unfulfilled, or seem 
needless and uncalled for). [In this case he would 
use the word ἀδόκιμος in two different senses: in 
the one sense he would not be unapproved, since 
the reformation of the Corinthians would be the 
best proof of his Apostolic power, but in another 
sense he would be unapproved, because he would 
fail in the fulfilment of his threatenings, on ac- 
count of their reformation. He meant to say that 
he cared not for being unapproved in the latter 
sense, since they would be saved and edified. 
Comp. Stanley]. Another explanation is given 
by Meyer, who takes ἵνα in the sense of, that, in 
order that, and understands δόκιμοι of the appro- 
bation which would be awarded to him as their 
spiritual father, if they should conduct themselves 
well; ‘but he makes addéxcuoe refer to his failure 
in exercising and applying his power as an 
Apostle to inflict punishment. It must be con- 
ceded that the idea advanced in this first expla- 
nation lies not within the range of thought pur- 
sued by the context, and yet it would not be. 
inconsistent with Paul’s manner, to say that the 
good conduct of his readers might make hin 
seem in one aspect δόκιμος and in another ἀδόκ, - 
μος. He certainly gives reason in ver. 8 for 
saying that if they did well he would have no oc- 
casion for exercising his power as an Apostle to 
punish them, and therefore would in that same 
degree appear unapproved, inasmuch as he had 
laid down the ruleby which he would be governed 
in his course with them:—For we can do 
nothing against the truth, but for the 
truth (ver. 8).—The truth here may be ex- 
plained either as equivalent to moral truth 
(comp. 1 Cor. νυ. 8) or righteousness (a sense which 
is not allowable unless it is made necessary by 
the context); or as signifying that he could do 
nothing which did not accord with the facts of 
the case, a meaning very appropriate to a judi- 
cial proceeding, but entirely unsuitable when we 
come to the phrase for the truth. Meyer makes 
the word mean the truth κατ᾽ ἐξοχῆν, i. e., the 
gospel: “Τῇ their good conduct had not been his 
object (ἀλλ᾽ ive) he would have been working 
against the Gospel; since that was a system de- 
signed to promote morality on Christian princi- 
ples.” Osiander’s explanation is preferable: 
“The Divine law was the truth from which we 
deduce all our rules of discipline; and in Paul’s 


ject of ποιῆσαι [that I may do you no evil], is | Apostolic work he could do nothing against this, 
unsatisfactory: 1, because he could not apply | but every thing he did would finally result in the 


210 





advancement of that Divine truth which was dis- 
pensed in the Gospel.” Kara against—irép, for 
its interests. In the latter sentence δυνάμεϑά τι 
should be supplied.—For we rejoice when 
we are weak and ye are strong: this also 
we pray for, even your restoration to 
complete order (ver. 9).—His object here was 
to confirm what he had said in ver. 4, by assur- 
ing them that he would rejoice, even if he were 
weak, i. ¢., powerless, so far as relates to the 
exercise of discipline among them (from want of 
occasion); and they were strong, ¢. e., should 
conduct themselves so wisely as to disarm him of 
all judicial authority against them. If this were 
so, how could he do anything in opposition to 
the truth, and to those rules of action which the 
truth prescribed? He furthermore assures them 
that it was the object of his constant prayer, that 
they might in this way be made strong. Asin ver. 
7 εὔχεσϑαι signifies not merely to wish, for it is 
an advance beyond the thought expressed in ya/- 
pouev. Τὴν κατάρτισιν ὑμῶν is added after τοῦτο 
epexegetically, and signifies your restoration to 
complete order, 7.¢., perfection. The verb is used 
in ver. 11 and in 1 Cor. i. 10, and καταρτισμός in 
Eph. iv. 12. It contains a reserved hint that their 
condition at that time was disorderly.—For this 
cause being absent I write these things, 
lest being present I should use sharpness 
according to the power which the Lord 
gave me for edification and not for de- 
struction (ver. 10).—In this he adds an expla- 
nation of his design in writing this Epistle: «I 
have written because my joy and my great anx- 
iety before God is, that ye may be strong and 
restored to your proper state.’’ In this expres- 
sion he had reference to the whole Epistle, but 
especially to the latter part of it.—He here uses 
the singular number, because he begins to treat 
of conduct and purposes which belonged only to 
himself. ᾿Αποτόμως (Tit. i. 18, the noun is in 
Rom. xi. 22) signifies roughly, rigorously, with 
strict severity (from a verb signifying to cut or 
tear off). Κρῆσϑαι is here used absolutely, and 
signifies to proceed, to act; in other places it is 
used with the dative of the mode of proceeding 
or acting, but here, with an adverb, there is no 
need of supplying ὑμῖν. The reason for his 
wishing not to act thus, he gives when he says 
that his power was given him for edification 
and not for destruction (comp. chap. x. 8). [He 
had no power or authority for the injury of 
men: it was all for their edification. Except for 
the latter purpose therefore it was not only null 
and void as to authority, but it was actually 
powerless in result. By a beautiful figure he 
conceives himself as a builder intrusted with no 
right or means to do anything except for the 
welfare of his fellow-men, to advance the true in- 
terests of humanity. Such were the Apostle’s 
views of the limits of ecclesiastical power with 
respect to οἰκοδομὴν. Comp. on 2 Cor. v. 1 and 
x. 8. Also J. 5. Howson, on Paul's use of Meta- 
phore in Sund. Mag., 1867}. 

Vers. 11-13. Finally, brethren, rejoice. 
Be perfectly joined together, be comfort- 
ed, be of one mind, be at peace (ver. 11 a). 
—Having in the previous verses resumed his ori- 
ginal mildness of manner, he now concludes with 
some friendly admonitions, though without re- 





THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


on 


laxing anything in the earnestness of his pur- 
pose. [The word ἀδελφοὶ, which he so often 
uses in his other Epistles and especially in his 
First Epistle but so seldom (only four times) in 
his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, indicates 
here the importance of what he was about te 
say, and his transition to a new section, in which 
his affectionate spirit breathes forth with espe- 
cial power.] In ver. 11, λοιπόν does not signify: 
for the future, henceforth, but it is a concluding 
particle in the sense of, as for the rest (ceterum), 
as in the Eph. vi. 10 ete.; 2 Thess. iii.1. Os1an- 
DER: ‘His object was to say, that he had some- 
thing of importance to them, still upon his 
heart.” This was addressed not exclusively to 
those whose minds were best disposed toward 
him, but like the preceding verses, to the whole 
congregation. Χαίρετε is not here a parting salu- 
tation, for that is given afterwards in ver. 13; 
but an exhortation to rejoice in the Lord (Phil. 
iii. 1, iv. 4). very appropriately pressed upon 
them after all that he had said in this Epistle to 
grieve them. But this χαίρειν could take place 
only on condition of the καταρτίζεσϑαι and the 
τέλειον γίνεσϑαι, i. e., on condition of their com- 
plete restoration to order and to their perfection. 
These are here urged upon them as acts which 
they must themselves perform [middle voice and 
reflexive} under the power of the χαίρειν, which 
again is conditioned by the καταρτίζεσϑαι. W. 
F. Besser: ‘‘In the alarm cry: Be perfect, 
(prepare yourselves)! hear the call of your com- 
mander, to form into rank and file, and to get 
into order of battle” (Col. ii. 5). But both the 
χαίρειν and the καταρτίξεσϑαι were the conditions 
on which the παρακαλεῖσϑαι was dependent. This 
παρακαλεῖσϑε is here not an admonition or an ex- 
hortation that they should make progress in spi- 
ritual things (give attention to it among you), 
but that they should be comforted (comp. i. 4-7; 
vii. 7-13) with respect to all those things which 
had grieved them. An exhortation to mutual 
comfort (to comfort one another) would have 
been differently expressed: παρακαλεῖτε ἑαυτοὺς 
or ἀλλήλους (1 Thess. iv. 18; v.11; Heb. ili. 18). 
Finally he calls upon them to be of one mind (τὸ 
αὐτὸ φρονεῖτε), Which may be regarded as implying 
an humble estimate of each one’s own self, a love 
for one another, and a tender interest in each 


other’s welfare, on the ground that they had a 


community of interests in the Christian life (Phil. 
iii. 15-16; iv. 2; Rom. xii. 16; xv. 5; Beck See- 
lenl. p. 61), and to live in peace, ἢ. e., to main- 
tain unity of action in the outer life (Mark ix. 
50; Rom. xii. 18; 1 Thess. v. 18). 
admonitions he attaches yet further a promise: 
—And the God of love and peace shall 
be with you (ver. 11 4)—i. 6., if ye do these 
things, the God who is the author of love (τὸ 
αὐτὸ φρονεῖν) and of peace (comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 33; 
Rom. xv. 88; xvi. 20; Phil. iv. 9; 1 Thess. y. 
23; Heb. xiii. 20) will be with you, will be near 
you to bless you, and to grant you the enjoyment 
of His gracious communion. That God from 
whom love and peace proceeds, makes those who 
yield to His influences in these respects, and are 
faithful in such things, experience how rich is 
His grace, and how abundant are His blessings. 
—Salute one another with a holy kiss 


To these — 


(ver. 12).—On this verse comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 20, " 


CHAP. XII. 19-21. 


XIII. 1-14. 217 





[With respect to the φίλημα ay. see on 1 Thess. 
y. 26; Rom. xvi. 16, and 1 Cor. xvi. 20. Among 
the Greeks the kiss had only an erotio significa- 
tion, but among the Jews and Oriental nations 
it was generally a token of affection among kin- 
dred and friends. The Jews refused it to all 
except the holy seed of Israel. Thence it passed 
into the Christian community; and Justin says, 

Apol. 11. p. 37), ‘‘After the prayers are ended 
ΤΕ the church), we greet one another with a 
kiss.” Cyril (Hier.) says that before the ‘sur- 
sum corda,’) a deacon proclaimed to the commu- 
nicants in the words of this verse: ‘Salute” 
etc. In the Eastern churches it was given be- 
fore, and in the Western after the consecration 
of the sacramental emblems, and before their 
distribution, as a sign of reconciliation and love. 
In the Apost. Constt. it is said: ‘‘Let the men 
salute one another, and the women also one an- 
other, with a holy kiss in the Lord.” Paul an- 
ticipated that his Epistle would be read before 
the whole Church, and he, therefore, connected 
with it this ecclesiastical or hieratic usage, as a 
sign of the common covenant by which they were 
all members one of another and the body of 
Christ. Bineuam, Chr. Antt. B. XII. Ch. IV. 2 
δ. Smirn’s Dict. of the Bible, OstANDER and 
Worpsworth, on 1 Thess. V. 26].—All the saints 
salute you (ver. 13).—The words οἱ ἄγιοι πάντες 
refer to those saints who lived in the region from 
which he was writing (Macedonia), but a more 
comprehensive sense of the words is not ex- 
cluded (comp. Osiander, who very thoroughly 
discusses the meaning of this whole verse). In 
place of his own salutation, he gives us finally 
that precious Benediction which has acquired 
such a liturgical importance in every age and in 
every part of the Christian world:—The grace 
of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of 
God, and the communion of the Holy 
Ghost, be with you all (ver. 14).—[It is the 
most formal and solemn of all Paul’s forms of 
benediction, and accordingly has been univer- 
sally selected as the one tobe used by the 
Church in its worship. It ascribes to each Per- 
son of the Trinity a special but not an exclusive 
part in the work of redemption. Each of those 
Persons share in the work of grace and love and 
communion, but each of them is distinguished 
for a peculiar prominence in one of these depart- 
ments. Each of them are mentioned with equal, 
but with a distinct honor and efficiency. They 
are presented, not according to their ontologic 
or metaphysical nature, but to their economic re- 
lation to sinful men in the work of salvation. 
That salvation comes to us ‘“‘from*(éx) God the 
Father, through (διὰ) God the Son, and byGod 
the Holy Ghost.’’] The Benediction itself is di- 
vided into three parts in accordance with the re- 
lations of the sacred Trinity. We have first, the 
grace of the Lord Jesus Christ (comp. chap. viii. 
9; Rom. v. 15), that grace which is continually be- 
stowed upon, intercedes for (Rom. viii. 34), and 
strengthens (chap. xii. 9) those whom he has 
redeemed, and by means of which they come 
into the possession and enjoyment of the love of 
God. The communion of the Holy Ghost, the 
participation in Him and in His gracious influ- 
ences, is the product of that grace and this love, 
and is His continual direction and application of 


them to believers (comp. Rom. viii. 9-26, 27; 
vii. 6; viii. 11; Gal. iv. 6; vi. 8. Kowvia, as 
in Phil. ii. 1, and 1 Cor. i. 9, signifies not com- 
munication merely, for τοῦ πνεῦμ. is the gen. 
subj.). He thus desires that the whole Church 
[even that portion which he had been obliged in 
some respects to censure] may enjoy all the 
blessings of God’s salvation, as they are shed 
forth by the Lord of the Church, including that 
Spirit which is the bond of its fellowship and the 
source of its organic life. Neanper: ‘We have 
in this passage the practical doctrine of the Tri- 
nity, the Father revealing His love in Christ; 
Christ, in and through whom he reveals Himself, 
and by whom the work of redemption (grace) is 
accomplished; and the fellowship of Divine life, 
which proceeds from Christ.”—Ewatp: ‘We 
cannot but feel an intense interest in knowing 
what was the effect of a letter containing such an 
unusual amount of severity. Fortunately we have 
some reason to conclude from Rom. xv. 25-27, 
and Acts xx. 2, that the result was all that could 
be wished. Paul actually returned. to Corinth 
soon after sending this Epistle, and remained 
there for some time in peace, as he certainly 
could not have done, if this letter had not 
smoothed the way for him there, and enabled 
him to return to his beloved Church in triumph. 


DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 


1. Where an impenitent spirit which disre- 
gards all warning and admonition becomes ma- 
nifest in a congregation, there is no other way 
than to administer discipline with severity. And 
yet the minister of Christ should always be care- 
ful to produce the impression that he is by no 
means proud of his official authority, but that he 
rather feels humbled under the hand of God 
when he finds that he is compelled to administer 
discipline with severity. He must indeed never 
spare, when he is called to act in behalf of 
Christ’s authority, if it is evident that his for- 
bearance will be imputed to a want of power in 
that Lord whom he represents, and whose organ 
he is known to be. Every one should be made 
to see not only that a minister, in imitation of 
his Divine Master, may for awhile lay aside his 
power and even appear feeble as he bears and 
forbears with his brethren, but that through the 
same Divine power which raised his Lord from 
the weakness of the cross to the might of an ab- 
solute and all-sufficient life, he possesses a living 
power for the accomplishment of those objects 
which are essential to the office he has received, 
and to his+riumph over all who oppose him in 
his lawful work. But the same love which, on 
suitable occasions, refrains from all assertions 
of authority, will also incline him to make every 
exertion to avoid any necessity for its exercise. 
He will admonish, entreat and implore God that 
every thing which insolently puts Christ in him 
to the proof whether His threatenings are se- 
riously intended, and whether He will ventare to 
execute them, may disappear; that all who have 
been refractory and disorderly may have their 
attention turned rather to themselves to see 
whether they are in the faith and whether Christ 
is in them, and that so they may be reéstablished 
in Christian fellowship, may do that which is 


218 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


SC .. &LR—— -ἜἬἨἘ  ὠϊ ΐπκπδπτττττΤοὐοὐΥοσῆσσᾶρᾶρὖϑ“ορ“ρ“ρ5-πΠἰ|ιι:::οΣο7ι7͵Ἱ͵ 


good, and may be saved from the necessity of 
discipline. It will be a pleasure to him when he 
is able to exchange severity for gentleness, even 
though he may thus have the appearance of 
weakness. His only care will be so to conduct 
himself that Divine truth may be vindicated, that 
complete order may be secured, and that practi- 
cal religion may be promoted. 

2. Where Jesus Christ causes His grace to 
abound, and abundantly forgives, blesses and 
saves men, the love of God is revealed, and God 
Himself is freely and powerfully communicated 
to our souls. When this is the case and our 
souls are sealed by His grace, this love will be 
shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost, we 
shall be of one mind, we shall seek for the things 
that make for peace, we shall rejoice in the 
Lord, we shall earnestly aspire after perfection, 
and neyer want consolation when we are in 
trouble. In this manner the Church will be 
built up; and it is a blessed work to co-operate 
in the production of such a result by praising 
this grace and love, by bringing men into the 
communion of the Holy Ghost and by confirming 
them in it. No one, however, can perform such 
ἃ work unless he knows by experience what it 
is to rejoice in this grace, love and communion, 
and regards it as his highest privilege to continue 
to do so. 


HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 


Starke:—Cuap. x. 19. That no impediments 
may be thrown in the way of our work, we must, 
though with humble diffidence, repel those as- 
saults which may be made upon it; but we must 
be especially careful lest we use such means of 
defence as will only make matters worse. Those 
who truly serve God, speak as though they were 
conscious of being ever before God in Christ, as 
though they were in communion with Him, and 
‘were under His direction.—Ver. 20. Where love 
is wanting, hatred will be found, and will break 
forth into every kind of discord, though all its 
forms will show a family likeness to one another. 
—Hepineur :—Ver. 21. How distressing to look 
upon such disorders! Those whose hearts are 
still bleeding from the wounds which former 
sins, especially those of lewdness and impurity, 
have left upon the conscience, should be careful 
that those wounds be properly healed, and that 
the old sore is not liable to break out afresh. 
Isa. xxxviii. 15.—Spener:—Chap. xiii. 1f. Even 
when we conclude that spiritual discipline does 
not call for a public judicial process, it should 
not be entered upon without reflection. If sin- 
ners have no fear of punishment, they will flat- 
ter themselves with the hope of impunity in sin. 
—Hepincer:—To bear long is not necessarily to 
bear always. Even Elisha finally called for the 
bears, Samuel grasped the sword, and Elijah 
invoked fire from heaven, when time and pa- 
tience were exhausted. Scoff not at God, who 
will surely give testimony in behalf of His ser- 
vants.—Ver. 3, Let us see to it, that we do not so 
conduct ourselves that Christ is obliged to put 
forth His hand to punish rather than to assist us. 
The threatenings of God’s faithful ministers will 
not be found empty words.—Hepinarr :—Ver. 4. 
Rejoice, for the Lord is King, and reigns in the 


midst of His enemies! Let no one be intimidated 
when the powers of darkness seem to prevail] 
If we would be exalted, we must humble our- 
selves and cheerfully bear Christ’s cross.—Spr- 
neR:—Ver. 5. Many know not their own selves; 
for while some think too well of their own good- 
ness, others are faint-hearted. A faithful self- 
examination would rectify all such errors. Most 
of us by nature have the bad habit of trying our 
neighbors and seeking a*proof of what is in 
them, but of neglecting the same thing with re- 
spect to ourselves, Matth. vii. 1-3.:—Herpincer: 
—‘*Thou sayest: I am a Christian, a child of 
glory!” But hast thou proved this? Art thou 
really sure of it? Is it not possible that thou 
hast taken up with a vain conceit and received 
base coin for gold? Let every one search his 
own heart diligently, and if he finds Christ and 
the graces of Christ’s Spirit there, if Christian 
love and a fraternal spirit reigns there, all is 
well.—Srenrer:—While we examine ourselves, 
we almost invariably are led to pray that the 
Lord also would search and make us know our 
hearts, Ps. exxxix. 23, 24.—If we have a faith 
which works by love, we have good evidence of 
our gracious state and of our salvation. Such 
an examination of ourselves is of great import- 
ance: 1, because our hearts are naturally so cor- 


_| rupt and our self-love is so inordinate that we 


never discover evil in ourselves without great 
difficulty ; 2, because in the midst of so many 
cares and so much intercourse with our fellow- 
men, we are in danger of neglecting to watch 
over our thoughts, words, etc.; 8, because of the 
injury which is sure to follow the omission of 
this duty, in our continuance under delusive 
fancies, or our relapse into them; 4, because of 
the benefits which a frequent self-examination 
must bring, in the increase of faith, in assurance 
of salvation, in our security against apostasy, in 
our growing union and intimacy with God, in 
our better acquaintance with our faults, and in 
our purification from them by Divine grace. But 
the object of this trial is, to ascertain: 1, whe- 
ther we have been truly converted, believe in 
Christ, and are united to Him, and whether we 
have the comforts and put forth the fruits of 
faith, such as the love of God and of our neigh- 
bor, delight in spiritual things, an inclination to 
every form of obedience, earnestness in prayer, 
lively hope, patience, etc.; 2, how successful we 
have been in following Jesus. The result will 
be, that we shall recognize what is good in our- 
selves with humility and thankfulness to God, 
and what is wrong with contrition, and prayer 
for forgiveness; we shall lay hold upon Divine 
grace with greater eagerness; and we shall 
arouse ourselves to walk before God with in- 
creased earnestness. It should be a special ob- 
ject of such an examination to discover what sins 
most easily beset us, and to what extent we have 
succeeded in laying them aside.—Ver. 7. Preach- 
ers will find it better to use their staff of office 
with gentleness, than to put forth the power 
given them so as to give pain.—Ver. 10. Think 
it not for thy injury that thy spiritual guide has 
touched thee rather roughly, for proud flesh needs 
a corrosive plaster.—Ver. 11. We must not be sur- 
prised that believers should not unfrequently be 
depressed with internal as well as external afflic- 


CHAP. XII. 19-21. 





tions, notwithstanding the seeds of spiritual joy 
they always possess. The admonition therefore 
can never come amiss, that they should be of 
good cheer and be joyful in the Lord.—Many 
heads, many minds! Look therefore continually 
to Christ or thou canst never come to Him. God 
dwells in souls exercised to good works through 
faith in Christ.—Ver. 13. Every minister should 
reflect whether such a salutation could go forth 
from him to his hearers.in the spirit of the 
Apostle, with an earnest desire for their salya- 
tion and with a sincere faith in God; but it 
equally becomes these hearers to consider care- 
fully whether they are prepared to appropriate 
such a salutation to themselves, and to confirm 
it with an earnest prayer and a hearty amen be- 
fore God.—There are many who are unreason- 
able enough to long for the grace of Jesus Christ 
and the love of the Father, but are unwilling to 
be directed and sanctified by the Holy Ghost.— 
Let every one who reads and desires a part in 
the blessings promised in God’s word, unite in 
applying this benediction to all, and add his 
hearty amen! 

BeRLENB. BIBLE, CaP. x11. 20:—Such are the 
disorders which follow a removal from the sim- 
plicity of the Gospel.—How much reason has a 
sincere child of God for sorrow and humiliation 
when he thinks of the abomination of desolation 
in the holy places of the Church at the present 
time, and when he finds that everything there is 
disordered, that self-conceit, false wisdom, and 
confusion so generally prevails, and that almost 
every man’s hand is turned against his brother! 
—Chap. xiii. 2: We must never connive at 
wickedness. But if it is willing to come to the 
light it should be freely forgiven.—Ver. 4. It is 
God’s way sometimes to seem very small in His 
servants, but if they are despised, He manifests 
Himself in His greatness.—Ver. 5. There is no 
point on which men are so liable to be deceived 
as with reference to their own faith. Onno point 
therefore should they be more careful to examine 
themselves. Unconverted men and hypocrites 
never prove their own selves. And yet no 5ne can 
enjoy communion with God without it, for such 
8. communion requires us to give up self-love for 
God’s love, and to pass an impartial judgment upon 
ourselves.—Those who pay no attention to their 
condition, and never reflect whether they are 
prepared for another world, will surely be un- 
able to abide the fiery trial of God’s justice and 
will be cast away and dashed in pieces as worth- 
less vessels.—The human heart is a fathomless 
abyss; we only need closely and properly to 
observe it to find in it every day some new thing 
to humble us before God and to make us willing 
to be judged by God and man. We must not, 
however, be insensible of the good which God has 
wrought in our hearts, for we shall never have 
courage to fight against our sins, if we know not 
our interest in Christ.—Especially should we 
examine whether we have that peace with God 
through Jesus Christ, which excites us to pray, 
to strive against sin, to praise God, to walk 
before Him, and to hunger and thirst after righ- 
teousness; and whether all our hope is built 
upon a consciousness of faith in Christ and love 
toGod. Nor should we be satisfied unless we find 
these evidences during the whole course οὗ our 


—————————————————————E—— ES ee 


XIII. 1-14. 219 





lives.—No one will become free from sin unless 
he is willing truly to know himself.—Ver. 11. 
Where love and peace reign, the heart becomes 
a temple in which God is adored and praised in 
spirit and in truth.—Ver. 13. Such is the order 
in which God conveys His blessings to men. 
Christ and His grace must precede everything 
else, or our evil consciences will prevent us from 
trusting to the love of God. Both are united 
together in our hearts by the fellowship of the 
Holy Ghost. This three-fold band encircles all 
who are willing to be the Lord’s, and makes 
them children of the Father, members of the 
Son, and temples of the Holy Ghost. Amen! 
Riecer:—Cnap. xii. 20f. We are sometimes 
too careful to conceal those sins which take 
place in our own hearts and in our Christian 
community, and the consequence is they are not 
thoroughly removed. Where we do not bring 
what has been done in former times with suffi- 
cient honesty into the light of Divine truth, 
and to the forgiving and sanctifying grace of 
God, great mischief will afterwards spring from 
them.—Chap. xiii. 1. In matters of.conscience we 
should hold ourselves to the strictest method of 
proceeding. Even those remarks and judgments 
which Christians pass upon one another, should 
be so thoroughly considered that they will bear 
an examination like that which is given to the 
most suspected witness in a judicial process.— 
Ver. 4. From His advent into the world until the 
close of His earthly career, Christ made Himself 
so weak that sinners thought they could do with 
Him as they pleased. But He now possesses 
through Divine power a life, in which He not 
only has life in Himself, but He gives life to the 
world, and sends His Spirit to make even the 
word of His cross the power of God unto salva- 
tion. Alife of faith in the Son of God is even 
now a life of Divine power. Those who are 
troubled about their infirmities, will find that in 
losing life they receive a life eternal.—Ver. 5. A 
faith which does not bring us into communion 
with God, nor bring Christ and His Spirit into 
the heart, will never abide the test.—Ver. 7. Our 
threatenings and punishments must have the 
unction of prayer, or they will accomplish no 
good results. We not unfrequently find that we 
can get no access to men until we have found 
access to God.—Ver. 11. Even where considerable 
faults are known to exist among brethren, we 
must come back to the common relation in which 
we all stand to one another, that by its means all 
may be awakened to joy without giving up their 
faith.—Ver. 13. Every. good thing we have or 
hope for from God, must come to us through the 
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. The love of God 
can be exercised only toward those who find par- 
don and access to him through Jesus Christ. 
Andit is only through the fellowship of the Holy 
Ghost that God will have or maintain any union 
with those whom he loves (John xiv. 23).—May 
we all be justified by grace, as pardoned sinners 
be the objects of Divine love, and as temples of 
the triune God be restored and glorified by 
Spiritual communion. May every soul have a 
part in this faith and in this prayer. Amen. 
Hevusner:—Cuar. xt. 20f. Every Church 
should be always ready to let any of Christ's 
ministers examine carefully into its affairs. 


220 


- 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


Ss ey 


—Chap. xiii. 1f. There are certain limits beyond 
which Christian meekness cannot go, whether in 
the use of gentle or severe measures. But what- 
ever change circumstances may call for in our 
outward action, our hearts should always be ani- 
mated by the same benevolent spirit. The Chris- 
tian should always act with energy.—Ver. 3. 
God not unfrequently disciplines His people 
with severity, and they should not be unwilling 
to be severe with themselves. What is a single 
preacher against an army of soldiers? And yet 
he has mighty power with them. Christ will live 
forever and will hold His sceptre over the world. 
Few worldly men imagine how completely 
He is their Lord.—Ver. 5. To be displeased 
with Christ’s word shows plainly that faith is 
dying or dead. Only those who examine them- 
selves cantruly know whether they have this faith, 
for no other one can determine this for them. 
Then the only evidence which can prove that we 
possess it is Christ living and working in our 
hearts, and our hearts burning with love at the 
thought of Him. How few tried Christians 
would be found, if this only true test were faith- 
fully applied !—Ver. 7. A faithful minister thinks 
only of the interest of souls, and not of his own 
authority or reputation among men.—Ver. 9. A 
genuine teacher always rejoices to see his pupil 
become wiser than himself.—Ver. 10. The church 
which gives heed to gentle and kind suggestions 
is much more advanced than one which can be 
moved only by harsh measures. The object of 
all spiritual power is the salvation of the Church. 
—Ver. 11. God is never in a church except 
where the conditions required in this verse are 
fulfilled. Where these are complied with, God’s 
Spirit reigns.—Ver. 13. Through the Son we 
become children of the Father and temples of the 
Holy Ghost. 

W. F. Besser:—Ver. 4. We may derive much 
benefit and comfort from contemplating the form 
of weakness which Christ endured during His 
life and on the cross, since it is the form of One 
who has been invested with Divine power, having 
entered into His glory by the power of that Fa- 
ther who has raised him from the dead, and of 
that Son who was raised from the dead, and of 
that Holy Ghost who declared and demonstrated 
that this Son of God and this Son of Mary was 
the Prince of life (Rom. vi. 4; i. 4). The same 
Divine power which raised up Christ from the 
dead and set Him upon the throne of heaven, is 
the source of all faith in the hearts of believers 
(Eph. i. 19, 20), and is concerned in the whole 
work of the ministry for the consolation of the 


penitent and the punishment of the impenitent. 
—Ver. 5. We learn two things here: a. that we 
may imagine ourselves to be in the faith when 
we are not; and ὁ. that whoever deceives himself 
in this matter, so essential to his everlasting sal- 
vation, is criminally guilty for it; for God has 
made it the privilege and the duty of every man 
by faithful self-examination to ascertain with 
confidence whether he is in the faith.—Ver. 7. 
A minister’s fitness for his work will appear in 
two ways: a. from the good results of his labors 
(chap. iii. 8); δ. from his seasonable punishment 
of evil conduct.—Ver. 11. This friendly admo- 
nition: Live in peace, throws the peaceful bond | 
of brotherly love around the whole body of be- 
lievers (Eph. iv. 8), and is like a lock which 
holds together the whole chain of exhortations 
running through both these Epistles. 
the peace which breathes here these Apostolic 
words might be imparted to all men! To all sons 
of peace, who rest in peace-as on a mother’s bo- 
som, belongs the promise: ‘‘ The God of love and 
peace shall be with you!”—Ver. 18. The grace 
of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God will 
not be far off, but pervadingly nigh the assem- 
blies of God’s saints; for among them the Holy 
Spirit’s communion has its especial habitation and 
sphere of action (1 Cor. iii. 16). As the Holy 
Spirit communicates Himself to them through 
the word and sacraments, He produces and main- 
tains in them a holy fellowship with the Triune 
God and with each other. As often as we hear 
these words of Apostolic benediction, it is only 
as the spirit of that faith which has for centuries 
communicated so many blessings to those who 
have received it, awakes within us, that the 
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of 
God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, is 
with us and with all saints! 

Fiorey:—Ver. 13. How happy is our lot if our 
souls are united by a perpetual bond of living 
faith to the Triune God! This thought—a. keeps 
before us every day the great object that we 
should seek for ourselves, viz.: forgiveness 
through Christ, assurance of God’s love, and 
strength by means of the Spirit’s power; 5. 
makes us see that in every event of life we 
should strive to confirm and strengthen our fel- 
lowship with God; c. gives us strong consolation 
in every affliction in the consciousness that Al- 
mighty aid is always at hand; and d. instructs 
us with respect to the true wisdom, the true rea- 
son, the spirit, the object, and the proper range 
of all our prayers. 


Total number of pages 596 


Oh, that ὁ 


ΟΡ iy 
Py Γ * " 


ἯΙ ᾿ ow had 
a ΝΉΝΕ 
δ ae 


6, ἡ ἢ ἡ ΝΑ ne 





ἮΝ ete AMI HY TERRAIN Li ἐ 
Ἷ ἱ Ἢ olf ΠῚ Ϊ ἢ ᾿ ᾿ ἢ J . be it 





Pal ἘΝ, 
“" if ‘Ay aM id ἢ". 


‘ 43) ΣΝ 


nt 


ie ΤῊΝ 

ne ᾿ 

ΜΝ 
i) 





_ 
— 
Γ᾽ Ἐ 
| oD 
a “ > 
= ‘ 


DATE DUE 


Demco, Inc. 38-293 








